Archive for: June 2015

Three more years for Gov. Nyandeng Malek: Is it office, constitution or term extension?

By Simon Yel Yel, JUN/30/2015, SSN;

Every year Nyandeng Malek confirms that she is the only stranger in Jerusalem. What she always does in Warrap are strange things that governors of other states don’t do.The adjournment of elections to 2018 due to the crisis in the country and what’s to be done have taken different philosophical jurisprudence versions in Warrap.

Nyandeng Malek and her cabinet have totally misinformed the citizens of Warrap by saying that they are extending the constitution of Warrap state so that the MPs don’t get fired by the president on 9th July 2015.

A number of indefensible and toadyism arguments have been made by lackeys of Nyandeng that are full of intellectual knavery and naivety; “Let people know that we are not extending personality of the incumbent Governor. We are extending the constitution and the office of the governor.” Really, really Hons?

It is a humbug or a jive and next to impossible to convince any person with sound mind rather to convince none another than M-pigs (MPs).

Where on earth can MPs extend the constitution? There is no raison d’être for it whatsoever the case may be.

In my own jurisprudence literacy, we don’t time the office but we time the person who occupies the office. We don’t extend the constitution but the time given to the occupant or holder of the office if there are political circumstances that can’t allow people to elect the new one.

In all over the whole world, terms are extended not the constitutions.

Like Plato making his argument in his book “Republic,” “that philosophers should become kings, as they possess a special level of knowledge, which is required to rule the Republic successfully.”

Nyandeng and her cohorts especially women in Juba have come to believe in their axiom that the affirmative action of 25% for women can only be met in South Sudan if Nyandeng Malek is a governor for life.

No term limits, Walai! Nyandeng Malek has become our Queen Elizabeth.

The cabinet and Nyandeng Malek have totally misinformed the citizens of Warrap State and more importantly they bewildered, lied and bribed our representatives in the parliament to extend the term of Nyandeng in the office for more three years in pretence of extending the constitution of Warrap.

Misinforming Warrap population and bribing the M-pigs have become essential survival techniques for Nyandeng government to continue looting and misruling the state.

It’s not only the extension of her term but almost everything starting from news reports, job opportunities, LCs, all the way down to the state salaries; when she and her finance minister want to launder money, they say, “We used money to make a bridge in Kuajok town to help people moving freely within town.”

Warrap citizens are either been misinformed, intimidated or forced to leave the state.

Interestingly, the Nyandeng’s cabinet political mini-skirt of always misinforming the public is getting shorter and shorter to cover the truth from citizens of Warrap at this time.

After docile citizens of Warrap realized that Nyandeng and her cabinet have misinformed them and bribed MPs (M-Pigs) to extend her term for three more years of misrule, thievery, money laundering and dictatorship in pretence of extending the constitution and the office of the governor, the state SPLM office in coordination with the youth took to the street to demonstrate their anger to their MPs and told them not to extend her term in the office.

But the M-pigs didn’t listen to their constituents but rather to recent letters of credit (LCs) which I can incorrectly call “letters of corruption” or “licenses of corruption,” and bribery of over 50,000 SSP for each M-pig.

This bribery had totally blocked their ears to hear the calls of their constituents and had blinded them to see that demonstrators are on the street with placards saying, “Five years are enough for Nyandeng.”

Nyandeng’s team headed by the finance minister did their homework very well on the M-Pigs on the night of the 17th. Some M-pigs were making the issue of bribery to be luid-pro-quos as sine-qua-non to vote for the extension of Nyandeng’s term in the office.

But the issue of money is not a problem with Nyandeng, all M-Pigs were hand-shaken with a cheque to change their smiling cheeks and they checked Nyandeng in the gubernatorial office for three more years again.

I swear, MONEY doesn’t lie, Walai, and it happened! Three more years of misrule is approved by 33 M-pigs, no joke with money, please, as some greedy people say in Arabic, “ El bothon gebel el wathon”.

Like the Pope telling the congregations in the Vatican, “let’s believe though we don’t understand, Christ has died and ascended to heaven.”

The Speaker of the parliament commanded the Mps on 18th June.2015 in the parliament to extend the term of Nyandeng though they don’t understand why should she deserved to be given three more years and what is she going to achieve in three years that she failed to achieve to in five years.

After she misinformed the public and got the approval of three more years from 33 M-pigs then her cabinet was very happy leading the chorus line, giggling and chanting all the noisy “Halleluiah,” Nyandeng Malek OYEE!, 25% OYEEE!, Warrap bi tana OYEE!, but still the ugly panorama of 25% OYEE!

Of Nyandeng misrule in Warrap State doesn’t need a rocket scientist or telescope to see it.

Nyandeng regime has only one system of political “modus operandi” to survive, born out of 25% Oyee!, lives on misrule and dies in corruption.

May President Salva Kiir Mayardit have mercy on us!

In conclusion, sometimes it seems to be an almost useless fight to try to tell truth to our people about how Nyandeng is running the state.

Nyandeng Malek sympathizers have been conditioned to attack the messenger for the message and try to discredit anyone who shows them how Nyandeng has been misruling Warrap.

They do also brand a concerned citizen like me as an opportunist who wants to be appointed into the cabinet or a pure antagonist who doesn’t want to be governed by a woman but am neither of the two.

I’m a concerned citizen of Warrap who loves to see Warrap prospering. The truth must be known and in the end it is only the truth that will set us all free.

Governor Nyandeng Malek is misruling the state and it is high time for our president Salva Kiir to remove her. Warrap can’t afford three more years again of misrule.

Simon Yel Yel is a concerned citizen and can be reached at maandeng2017@gmail.com or 0955246235.

UN: South Sudan army (SPLA) raped girls and burned them alive

Latest– Report by UN mission in South Sudan says recent military campaign was notable for its “brutality and intensity: ALJEEZERA, JUN/30/2015, SSN;”

The UN has accused South Sudan’s army of raping and then burning girls alive inside their homes during its recent campaign, a report by its mission in the country said.

The statement, published on Tuesday, warned the recent upsurge in fighting had been marked by a “new brutality and intensity.”

“The scope and level of cruelty that has characterised the reports suggests a depth of antipathy that exceeds political differences,” the UN said.

Women and children flee violence in South Sudan
Members of the UN mission in Sudan (UNMISS) said they interviewed 115 victims and eyewitnesses in Unity state where South Sudanese forces were involved in fighting against opposition fighters in April.

The survivors allege that the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) killed civilians, destroyed villages and displaced 100,000 people, the statement added.

The UN said attempts to corroborate the reports were prevented by the SPLA, which denied its teams access to the areas concerned.

“UNMISS human rights officers visited two additional sites of alleged atrocities and conducted more interviews of eyewitnesses and victims. The information gathered from those visits and interviews provided further corroboration of the earlier accounts,” the statement read.

“We call on the SPLA to fulfil this commitment and allow our human rights officers unfettered access to the sites of these reported violations,” said Ellen Margrethe Loej, the head of UNMISS.

The military spokesman for the South Sudanese army, Philip Aguer Panyang, told Al Jazeera that the accusations made in the report needed further verification, and questioned accusations South Sudanese troops had obstructed UN investigators.

“Our role as an army is to facilitate humanitarian deliveries and access for civilian protection,” Panyang said.

“If the UN has been denied access, they have the right to present those claims to the SPLA command.”

South Sudan attained independence in 2011 but the country has disintegrated into chaos.

Thousands of people have been killed and almost two million displaced in a civil conflict that erupted in late 2013 as forces loyal to Salva Kiir tried to put down an uprising led by his former deputy, Riek Machar.

Peace talks between the factions collapsed in March this year, and clashes have since escalated.

Kiir said that he will not be forced into a premature peace deal and rejected the UN threat of sanctions against his country. END

SPLM-IO Green Leafs Army capture Farajala Boma in WBEG State- PR

JUNE, 29, 2015. Forces from the Green Leaves Army of Western Bahr Elghazal State loyal to Dr. Riek Machar Teny, this morning captured the strategic Boma of Farajala, 28 miles South West capital Wau.

The battle came as a defensive measure from the rebel forces when the government forces were about to advance and take position within their zone.

Eight soldiers were killed from the government forces, three RBG captured including one Garanov and five Kalashnikovs.

Lt/Col Penson Joseph who carried out the operation confirmed their full control over the area.

Col Jesendo Alberto Nimr the commander in charge of the special forces of the Green Army confirmed their commitment to respect the cease fire, but reserved the right of self defense in any case of aggressive act.

The G-10 (former detainees) & the fiasco of SPLM Unification

BY: YIEN LAM, JUN/28/2015, SSN;

As a concerned and heartbroken citizen of this great nation, I am deeply disappointed in part with what the so-called SPLM G-10 -whatsoever, and the word Party have been used as the reunification per se. This has no meaning in my view. G-10 and its interest is different with the viable peace and the interest of South Sudanese.

As many have seen the colors of the G-10 in recent visits to Juba, whereby its leader has been awarded with his original position as the SG (Secretary-General) of the party. If that is so as we all know, do you think this group really cares about well-being of people of South Sudan?

No! This is not unless you have mental disability. The group does not mean a true reunification of all SPLMers, what it means is to seek positions in the future government of Salva kiir. That is why it goes in so quickly.

It knows very well that the regime is going to reshuffle its government by the July of this year. This is the simple calculus that can be known by anyone in the country. The group has no ammunition to give peace a shot or a viable reason other than that when it comes to the peace in Addis Ababa, trust me.

Never will its return to Juba ever produce tangible peace in our country. This group is worse than the killer regime in my view because juggling as such with the lives of south Sudanese is not worth it.

As the matter of fact, let the group not bluff the public with the word ‘reunification’ that does not bear any fruit in the group’s heart. It uses this as the political ploy.

If that was really reunification for all, why did the group go in so soon by itself without waiting the other side?

Not only that, why was reunification happening in the city of evil than the original place of peace, namely Arusha?

People, believe it or not, this so-called reunification will not be like the 1987’s when the SPLM reunified with Anya Nya II in Kuanylow where by all Anya Nya II soldiers were integrated into SPLA without addressing the root cause of division that took place in Bilpam?

Because the mentioned reunification did not address the grievances of the Anya Nya II, the problem carried on and led to 1991 internal fighting because there is no reason to rush into agreement without sorting out what initially caused the problem.

Again, SPLM as the party reunified in January 2002 In Nairobi, Kenya that produced what we call South Sudan today. Many people were thinking we will be fine within our country. But again, the SPLM was not up to the task that it’s supposed to be.

This reunification miserably did not address again the principle of reforms and the meaning of being south Sudanese with the exception of self-determination. As a matter of reality, this problem did not stop there as most people expected.

It then led to the disagreement between current president and Dr. John Garang that was solved in Rumbek conference in 2004 that also failed to sort out the differences within the party. These were all about the SPLM inhumane treatment of itself or leadership struggle.

As the result of all cited incidences due to the lack of reforms, this took the very U turn on 15 December, 2013 catastrophe that killed only one ethnic group. This are supposed to be political issues as a group of this kind alluded to in its video address.

It indeed started as a political issue. The question is, if it was a political issue as the group acknowledged it, why were the victims of the political issue only Nuer while the group was a mixture of all people? Can anyone among the G-what so ever answer my question?

So, in my view, if those of SPLM-Juba members apologize and forgive each other as Pagan has alluded to in his speech, what would they be saying about the 20,000 innocent Nuer civilians who were slaughtered in broad daylight in the city of evil as well as the Shilluk people?

Should the SPLM-Juba be ready to once again tell us that it is ok to kill you and let us unite and ready to orchestrate another killing of you? Be the judge of this reunification.

I am done with the fake reunification to be honest with you the readers. I have no problem with anyone who is trashing the reunification of SPLM party ever as Juba SPLM is saying.

If the party leaders in Juba were thinking about the lives of South Sudanese, the 15 December 2013 catastrophe could have been prevented by the party. If they failed then, what would make a sound minded person to believe that it will not do it again after its leader killed 20,000 civilians and the root cause of the problem is not even resolved yet?

People, to be sincere in this case though, reunification with kiir in power is laughable if not impossible in my view. If some still naively think that it will be good while the reforms that are badly needed have not been addressed or implemented, the road to the recovery of our country must be in distant future.

Kiir and his sycophants must not get away with the death of 20,000 innocent lives and expect to be awarded with the leadership of the people to whom their relatives were killed by him.

How would that play in the minds of the soldiers that responded to the situation in defense of their remaining relatives?

Moreover, Mr. S G, if the SPLM leader namely kiir and you did not learn from all of the above, when are you going to learn? I thought you and kiir should have learned from the past if two of you have hearts for the country than the positions that you are holding because SPLM cannot repeat whatever happened as the political issue and only victimize few.

This has to be changed for good in order to prevent the next disaster within the people of South Sudan. Believe it or not, nation is better than the party not the other way around.

Finally, reunification without thinking behind the root cause that killed the people in the nation’s capital in the first place is a provision of a disastrous future. The positions seekers must not bluff the public with empty promise that does not hold any water in the war torn South Sudan.

In this case, the people of south Sudan must work hard to achieve the amicable peace through other means not reunification per se because reunification has no fruit of peace at all than the positions aim.

Therefore, bringing peace through fake reunification of the SPLM without resolving the root cause of current conflict will otherwise be the recipe of killings more innocent lives in future that we cannot afford to allow to happen in our country again. We need to act quickly as we can to dislodge this regime.

South Sudan Oyeee
Freedom fighters Oyeee
Opposition Oyeee

The Author is concerned South Sudanese that can be reached at Lam981@homtail.com

2 arrested and VP Wani Igga among the list of the money laundering suspects within the presidency

JUBA – (Vaious sources) Chief Administrator in the office of the President of the Republic and an executive Chief Executive serving the president were arrested this week in a major money laundering track down that has damaged the reputation of the president in his fight to curb down corruption in his administration.

Chief Administrative officers Mr Mayen Wol and Mr Yel Luol were suspected of pocketing more than $30 million dollars in money allocated to the services of the presidency over 2 years period.

The two men were believed to have wired 25 million dollars to 5 different bank accounts in Kenya from January 2014 and May 2015. The men were arrested and pending investigation charges that could serve them many years in prison.

VP Igga allegedly implicated in the theft.

According to investigation documents provided to the Upper Nile Times, Vice President Wani Igga is among the people the department of anti-corruption is trying to investigate. the report detailed that Igga allegedly had a thorough knowledge of a $15 million dollars money wiring scheme within the presidency and authorised in signature to allow the money be deposited to one of the 5 banking accounts in Kenya.

The report said that Igga allegedly signed on behalf of Kiir late last year while the president was away from the country to pave way for money remittance to the foreign bank account.

Also under investigation are Ministers Dr Martin Elia Lomoro, Minister Awan Guol Riak and Aide de Camp of Kiir General Akok Noon.

Office of President Kiir Mayardit. June 25, 2015. The Chief Administrator Mr. Mayen Wol and the Chief Executive of Kiir’s office Mr. Yel Luol have been suspended and being investigated for corruption charges.

It is also rumored that Mr. Mayen Wol is arrested. Also vice President James Wani Igga, Minister Dr. Martin Elia Lomoro, Minister Awan Guol Riak and Aide de Camp of Kiir General Akok Noon are implicated. SSN.

Kiir’s security agents demolished Gen. Martin Kenyi’s house in Juba

JUBA: JUN/27/2015, SSN;
South Sudan security operatives under President Salva Kiir in direct order and authorization from the office of President Salva Kiir, have stormed the empty family house of defected and renegade Major general Martin Kenyi Taratizio in the capital city Juba, and looted it flatly.

Neighbors reported seeing heavy deployments of the army around Juba last 48 hours but didn’t expect this and were shocked and dismayed with the amount of destruction caused by the army in the Capital Juba.

The army’s hostilities to the civilians has reached to an unbearable level, reported one eye witness and this is particularly so against those who have opposing views to that of president Salva Kiir, their properties have been subjected to demolition to give harsh punishment to the owners.

He added, “These days the only ones who feel safe in the Capital of the people are Kiir and his kin, every one else is a target to the tribal security organs.”

It is still not clear what prompted the army, the security and the country’s ailing President to trespass Martin kenyi’s property more than eight months after his defection to join the country’s armed opposition under the leadership of former vice President Dr. Riek Machar.

It is also not clear what have been taken away from the family house of Martin Kenyi, but based on the information coming from the neighbors, it seems the army and security gangs from the government have flatly looted the house.

The question is, if the Juba-led SPLA/M under the direct leadership of President Kiir is serious in implementation of Arusha agreement for unification of SPLM, why then continue to carry out destruction on properties of the members of armed opposition?

Why has Kiir unfroze the accounts of one of the most corrupt Politicians who have taken millions from the country’s coffers, and have continued to architect a plan to remove Kiir from his seat, and now are welcomed and reinstated in the their thrones of corruptions but yet target those who necessarily demand for an equal government of the people?

The world should not be surprised to see pres. Kiir has carried ethnic cleaning in the Capital city and the country against non-Dinka more specifically the Nuer but also Equatorians who have switched sides due to their discontentment in Kiir’s leadership.

But now a war of destruction and looting has been brought on their properties to punish them indirectly, yet awards and rewards are the price given to the most corrupt officials formally known as the “ G10” after their return to the country.

Their leader was said to have been awarded a staggering 15 Million US dollars to get him rejoin Juba SPLM, this at the time our country is at the verge of economic collapse!

The destruction and deprivation of properties of individual, is defined as property war.

The right to own property is inscribed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of December 10-1948, therefore destruction of properties during and after the war constitute to abuse of fundamental rights of every human being as inscribed in article Article 17 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights section I &II.

(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

This section can be translated into nobody’s property should be destroyed by the parties in the war, during the civil war; properties should not be targeted because their owners have different political views than the ruling party.

So what has happened to Martin Kenyi’s family house, and many other destruction of the personal properties in the country by the warring parties more especially in safe places under the absolute control and command of the government including country’s capital city, seriously amounts to violation of Human Rights of the individuals.

Of course it should be recalled, destruction of not only human lives but of properties was triggered by Kiir in Black December 2013 when Kiir unleashed death on the Nuer and Dr. Machar government house in Juba was bulldozed flat with over 20 lives of fellow South Sudanese quenched that night.

Are we surprised by what monster our government has become?

Andrew olweny

The immorality of cow tax in Lakes State: A letter to Daniel Awet Akot

BY: Agok Takpiny, JUN/28/2015, SSN;

On June 22 this year, Radio Miraya with Sebit Willaim on the Morning Breakfast Show, reported that the “Authorities in Lakes State are mulling over the possibility of introducing a tax on cattle. Under the proposals announced on Friday, cattle owners will be required to pay one South Sudanese pound per head of cattle they own.”

Daniel Awet Akot, the SPLM party chairman in Lakes State, says, “if introduced, the cattle tax will provide revenues needed to boost development in the state”.

This is troubling on many levels, the authorities in Lakes state, including Awet Akot are either inconsiderate or are utterly illiterate economically.

There are six main reasons why the government tax individuals or businesses. Let’s see where the cattle tax fits in.

Firstly, the government uses tax revenue to fund infrastructure, education, welfare and security. Under this view, citizens are obliged to pay taxes on their income from work if the taxpayer is an employee or from profits if the taxpayer is an investor.

In most cases an employee can be an investor at the same time and so he/she must amalgamate all his income from work and the profits from investment so that the yearly earning can be taxed as one.

In the case of South Sudan or Lakes state in particular, a question ought to be asked, where does the cow tax fit in here? Cows are mainly kept for consumption and not for commercial use and the cattle keepers are not working for an income generated employment neither, therefore the government purposing the cow tax is baseless.

Moreover, experience tells us that development has never been a priority for Lakes state authorities right from 2005 to present, therefore the claim made by the decorated General that taxing cattle keepers will boost development in the state is deceitful.

Secondly, a government can tax things that are believed to be negatively affecting the society’s behavior. For example, a year or so ago the state governor, Gen Matur Chut, issued a decree banning alcohol sale or consumption statewide with the exception of few semi-standard hotels.

The governor believed that alcohol was destroying young people and gelweng (cattle keepers) in particular.

In a sound economic policy aimed at social engineering or altering people’s behaviors, the state government should have just imposed high taxes on alcohol as a commodity which the government wants people to consume less of.

By imposing higher taxes, alcohol would become more expensive and out of reach for many people, hence higher prices will make people stop buying alcohol. Again, under this principle of taxation, the cow tax is unfair.

Thirdly, a government can use tax revenues to help the poor in the form of welfare. According to this view, wealthy people who have higher incomes have to pay more taxes as a way of reducing inequality of income.

Does the cow tax fit in here? Hardly, the cattle keepers are themselves among the poorest.

Furthermore, the widows of the heroes of our 21 years of struggle are now struggling without any help from neither the national nor state governments. South Sudan like many other African countries see welfare payment as a “waste” of money, hence the cow tax is unjustified.

Fourthly, the government can use taxation as a tool to control the inflation. One of the causes of inflation is ‘too much money chasing too few goods’. Government can take away the extra disposable incomes of the people through higher taxes and thus reduce the aggregate demand in the economy and resulting in a low inflation rate.

This principle of taxation has nothing to do with cattle keepers and their cows simply because cattle keepers don’t have money, some of them can go for many years without seeing 1 SSP.

The fifth principle which is about protecting local industry by taxing heavily the imported goods and charging low taxes on local produce is not applicable here.

And so do the six principles which are aimed at trade deficit or unbalanced payment where a government can tax imported goods more heavily to make them more expensive.

As explained above, the cow tax is immoral, it doesn’t serve a meaningful purpose. Although 1 SSP is not that big a sum, it is not easy for the cattle keeper to find. For example, if a man has 50 cows, he will then be required to pay 50 SSP a month; where will he get that money?

Of course he will have to sell one of his cows to be able to pay the tax. And if the authorities keep asking for the taxes, the cattle numbers will slowly diminish as there are not many more cows coming in.

By reducing the cattle numbers in the hands of cattle keepers this way, the quality of their lives will also decrease because cows in South Sudan don’t produce much milk like many other cows in the developed world where one cow produces 30 litres of milk a day, hence fewer cows mean even lesser milk for the family to live on.

Is that what a government is supposed to be doing, reducing the livelihood of poor and uneducated citizens who have no other means of income to live on? Where is the moral conscience of the leaders here?

Is this how the SPLM is supposed to pay back the Lakes state cattle keepers?

Mr Daniel Awet, instead of taxing the modest livelihood of the poor, you (SPLM) should be thinking of paying a compensation to the cattle keepers for their outstanding contribution during our struggle for the independence.

Mr Awet, you are better positioned than most of your colleagues to know what the cattle keepers have done throughout the 21 years of struggle. You have collected sheep, goats, grains, cooked food, milk and bulls and many other food items trillion times from the same people.

Cattle keepers were simply the backbone of the struggle, they did not only provide food to the soldiers, but they were also a means of transporting munitions and weaponry.

However, from 2005, like all cattle keepers across the country, no leader even bothered to acknowledge them and what they contributed for South Sudan to gain her independence.

Agok Takpiny is a concern South Sudanese citizen in Melbourne Australia, he can be reach at his email: agoktakpiny@ymail.com

The untold story of Israeli military exports to South Sudan and crimes against humanity

By: Adv. Itai Mack and Idan Landau (translation: Einat Adar), JUN/27/2015, SSN;

Since South Sudan’s independence, Israel has continuously sold it weapons, military training, homeland security and surveillance technology. The only problem? They are being used to commit war crimes and potential crimes against humanity.

We now know that Israel sold weapons to Rwanda in the 1990s as genocide was being committed throughout the country. The details of these dealings are still being kept secret and an appeal (Hebrew) to make them public is currently being examined in the High Court of Justice. No lessons, it seems, were learned from that affair.

For the last 18 months a bloody civil war has been raging in another African country, South Sudan, including documented war crimes and potential crimes against humanity. The international media is covering this war on a daily basis.

The Israeli media, on the other hand, reported about it during the first few months but has since become silent, even though atrocities are still being perpetrated.

This silence probably has a good reason: high-ranking officials in the government and the security industry are selling weapons, military training, homeland security and surveillance technology to factions in South Sudan. Any publication on these activities can seriously embarrass them.

Since the 1960’s Israel has been fighting a secret war in South Sudan by supporting the rebels’ struggle to break free from Khartoum’s tyranny. Israel’s support does not reflect its humanistic values or solidarity with a just and legitimate fight for freedom, but rather is the result of various strategic interests in the region.

In 2011 a referendum was held in South Sudan following massive pressure from the international community. Ninety-nine percent of residents voted in favor of breaking away from Khartoum, and on July 9th of the same year South Sudan became an independent country.

The State of Israel was one of the first countries to recognize the new state, and in 2011 Salva Kiir Mayardit, president of South Sudan, came to Israel on official visit.

For Israel, an independent South Sudan was a golden opportunity to further its security and economic interests in the area, and it subsequently made hefty investments in civil and military infrastructure there. The relationship between the two countries is exceptional even when compared to Israel’s close ties with other African countries, showing some signs of sponsorship.

This special relationship should also be understood in the context of regional power struggles. The local conflict between Sudan and South Sudan is sponsored by Iran and Israel respectively. As Iran reinforced its ties with Muslim Sudan, Israel strengthened its relations with Christian South Sudan, which also provides it with oil.

Two-and-a-half years ago Israel allegedly bombed an Iranian owned arms factory in Khartoum; a year ago the IDF intercepted a ship carrying munitions from Sudan to Gaza; and just this month an Israeli drone was reportedly shot down in Sudan. It is evident that Iran and Israel are fighting a proxy war through their African allies.

The only question is whether this semi-imperial strategy can, in any way, justify supporting South Sudan forces who perpetrate war crimes and crimes against humanity. No Israeli strategic interest, real or imaginary, can exempt it from the moral and legal responsibility to prevent the sale of any weapons that may be used for such purposes.

South Sudan’s celebration of independence sadly turned into one of the worst tragedies of our times. Since mid-December 2013 a civil war has been raging in South Sudan between opposing ethnic and political groups — a continuation of the bloody civil war that led to the country’s independence after 22 years.

According to the latest reports, 50,000 people were killed, 2 million people were displaced or became refugees, and 2.5 million people are at risk of starvation due to the war. Human rights organizations and the United Nations estimate that 12,000 child soldiers are fighting in South Sudan.

All parties involved in the fighting, and especially the government and its allied militias, are implicated in war crimes, crimes against humanity and severe violations of human rights.

Neither side is able to bring the war to an end, and no ethnic group has a clear majority in the country. The Dinka tribe, which is currently in control of the government, is only 35 percent of the population. Some of the opposition fighters are former security forces personnel who defected to the other side, taking their weapons and military training with them, thus making it harder for government forces to defeat them.

For these reasons, the government decided on an alternative strategy: mass murder, systematic rape of other ethnic groups, and abuse of citizens identified with the opposition. As long as weapons continue to stream into the country, the government has no interest in reaching a compromise, and it continues to cling to a false hope of defeating their enemies in the field.

This situation led European countries to declare a weapons embargo on South Sudan and the U.S. to suspend its military aid. There were also attempts to pass a similar embargo resolution in the UN Security Council.

So far these attempts have been unsuccessful due conflicts and arguments between the members of the council, as well as the fear that the rebels will defeat the government forces.

Despite the political difficulties involved in agreeing on an embargo resolution, the gravity of the situation in South Sudan is clear to all. On March 3 of this year the Security Council adopted U.S.-sponsored Resolution 2206, giving both sides an ultimatum threatening a weapons embargo and other sanctions if the fighting is not ended.

Despite the world’s reaction, Israel’s secret war in South Sudan continues according to reports and information provided by human rights activists who have been, or still are, in South Sudan.

Since the country’s independence, Israel has continuously sent it weapons, training government forces and providing various security-related technologies. There is also a cooperation between the two countries’ secret services, and Israeli entities have established an internal control and surveillance system in South Sudan, which they continue to maintain.

The current Israeli involvement in South Sudan is exceptional in the history of Israeli military exports. This goes way beyond greed. Israel is currently fighting over the viability of a project that it has invested much in over the years — a project whose failure may damage its credibility in the eyes of other dictators and regimes that receive military aid from Israel.

An official publication by the Ministry of Defense from November 2014 (almost a year after the beginning of the civil war in South Sudan) boasts (Hebrew) about the success of the defense export department at Cyber Security exhibition, visited by 70 delegations from around the world, including South Sudan. There are testimonies that the South Sudan military is using the Israeli Galil ACE rifle.

Eighteen months before the outbreak of the civil war, a Sudanese newspaper reported on an airlift from Israel to South Sudan, providing rockets, military equipment and even African mercenaries (after training). The provisions still continue to flow. A South Sudanese delegation will visit (Hebrew) an Israeli armament exhibition to be held next week in Tel Aviv.

Think about it for a minute: a country in which crimes against humanity are perpetrated at this very moment, using foreign weapons and under a complete weapons embargo by U.S. and Europe, sends a military acquisitions delegation to Israel and is being welcomed with open arms.

Both international law and basic human morality forbid the sale of weapons or other military aid which may serve in war crimes and crimes against humanity. In the past, due to the political conflicts of the Cold War, the international community failed to fulfill this obligation, but since the 1990s it has been transformed into decisive law in U.S. and Europe, as well as among international conventions and international institutions such as the UN and international courts.

Israel has no real way of ensuring the weapons it sells to South Sudan are not used to massacre civilians or threaten women as they are being raped by soldiers and militia fighters.

Furthermore, there is no way to ensure that the training of security forces is not used for the murder and torture of civilians and that the technology it provides is not used for persecuting citizens for their political or ethnic affiliations — not to mention supporting horrific war crimes and crimes against humanity — unless it completely stops all military and security-related exports to this country.

It is important to clarify that international law also forbids the sale of technologies and devices that “don’t shoot” if they may be used in committing war crimes and crimes against humanity.

On March 12 this year, Adv. Itai Mack gave an interview about military exports to South Sudan on the radio program “According to Foreign Media” (Hebrew), which is aired on the “All For Peace” radio station (beginning 47:50). Mack revealed more details about Israel’s involvement in providing weapons and training to South Sudan forces. Following these findings, Adv. Mack appealed to the Ministry of Defense to stop military exports to the country. The appeal, unsurprisingly, was rejected.

MK Tamar Zandberg (Meretz) is currently trying to break the seal of silence, by demanding that the Ministry of Defense cease all military exports to South Sudan immediately. The demand was accompanied by an expert opinion prepared by Adv. Mack, which details the factual and legal aspects of the issue (you can find the request and opinion in Hebrew here).

The Israeli public must join this request. And the time to do it is right now.

Idan Landau is an Israeli academic at Ben-Gurion University. This post was originally published in Hebrew on Idan’s blog, Don’t Die a Fool. It is reposted here with the author’s permission.

The Recent IGAD-plus Proposal and Dr. Machar’s comment

BY: Rigoberto Modi, JUN/26/2015, SSN;

The drama of finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict in South Sudan has reached another stage when one reads the two documents. IGAD is for a simple solution to South Sudan’s problem. Probably, the respectable regional block has bought into the idea that the problem in South Sudan is simply power struggle aggravated by tribalism.

So give Dr. Riak recognition and make him the First Vice President with the added prerogative of creating and controlling the Nuer Economic and Political Block defined as the states of Upper Nile, Unity and Jongolei. The rest belongs to Salva Kiir and his Dinka tribe.

After all these two tribes are the majority as well as politically and militarily powerful; and this division, which appears to be based on a subtle political insight possessed by only a few like President Museveni, who has been advising everybody about the solution to Africa’s problem, appears to be fair.

So in effect, IGAD has bought into the tribal politics of Africa and is willing to become the promoter of the same.

Furthermore, IGAD has also bought into power politics and not politics of democracy and the rule of law. This kind of politics suggests if you flex your military muscles enough, you will get something of the big cake.

South Sudanese, in the face of this so-called proposed IGAD document to resolve the problem in South Sudan, turn their faces towards Dr. Riak who has all along moved in favour of system reform in South Sudan.

This must be a tough time for Dr. Riak himself, not because of having to choose between having the whole and the part, but because this proposal came at the time he was given a huge recognition by the African Union to attend the summit of heads of states.

Therefore the script between the lines is, ‘welcome to the club but be good and follow what we, your benefactors are prescribing for you and everything will be fine for you’.

On the ethical front, this was difficult too. Because it tested the honesty of Dr. Riak in saying he is fighting for the reform of the system, not just for power.

If it was an interview to determine whether he is suitable for the position or not, this test could have been brilliant.

So his response, writing to 41 heads of states and pointing out the weakness of this proposal was truly a mark of honesty and sincerity in his intention to lead the nation into reform.

If this was a game, Dr. Riak has won it and his response made IGAD to look tribal minded and bent on driving South Sudan into deeper conflict and violence.

But it is not a game, it is a real issue that affects the lives of South Sudanese people both now and in future. Hence South Sudanese people and those who support them need to pick it up from here.

Almost all political commentators who have shown honesty in discussing the issues in regards to the current conflict in South Sudan have pointed out that handling it in a way of business as usual will not be useful at all.

To the contrary, it will sink the country into a deeper crisis. Hilda Johnson, the UN Special Representative in South Sudan clearly stated, before her departure, South Sudan needs to be rebooted.

If this was taken as unfair and critical view, it is good to remind ourselves that the Men of God, the Catholic Bishops of South Sudan have issued a pastoral letter on 31st January 2014, stating unequivocally that South Sudan has to be on a New Covenant.

The message of these clergymen cannot be taken lightly, considering the number of people they represent, the institutional memory on South Sudan they access and their level of commitment which saw them reaching out to almost all those who have contributed to helping South Sudan to emerge.

South Sudan is not broken in just a small part, but at the very foundation stone and the whole superstructure is crumbling everywhere.

Just the corruption alone is enough to tell the story and branding South Sudan as the rule of kleptocracy in the light of resources that have been misappropriated in broad daylight is more than enough to prove the need for a new starting.

There is a clear justification that everything has to be re-examined and remade. Layman N. Princeton et al (2014), p 2, have a similar view that ‘a narrow bargain among elites which has been the standard practice in negotiation in Sudan and South Sudan only perpetuates the exclusionary and corrupt politics that are one cause of the crisis and will inevitably lead to future crisis.’

Which is quickly echoed by Dr. Riak in his letter that, ‘The IGAD proposal on power sharing is based on tribalism and it is a recipe for war not peace’.

And if anybody should say that the IGAD document recognizes this fundamental issue but it deferred it to be resolved in later constitutional development process, it is easy to see that such assumption is both weak and wrong at the same time.

First, it conveys a wrong message for those who are left out, like the people of Equatoria and Western Bahr El Ghazal and the Lakes State.

Secondly, anything that is not embedded in the document of agreement is relegated to second or third or no priority at all. If the experience of the CPA (Comprehensive Peace Agreement) is anything to go by, then it is a forgone conclusion.

A quick fix is not a solution and it has the danger of deepening the crisis by exhausting people’s goodwill and energy by coming back to solve the same over and over again.

South Sudan has already been going through this and there is no wonder that this current conflict appears to attract less attention because the world asks the question again and again.

Why is this region always in the state of crisis? Is it an atavistic tendency with the people in the region that they cannot live in peace?

But if IGAD is going for a quick fix there must be a justifiable reason.

Since this has not been communicated, it leaves people wondering whether what IGAD lacks is the technical resources to go down to the root causes of this problem and hence come up with proposal that has the capacity to bring a comprehensive solution to the crisis in South Sudan.

If this is not the case then it could be the lack of political will to bring about real change in South Sudan which is now driving the whole IGAD mediation. I am sure IGAD has the legal mandate to mediate to the length it takes to bring about real peace in South Sudan.

The light coming from the regional politics, however, suggests what is lacking is the political will to find a genuine solution to South Sudan’s crisis.

This brings about the uncomfortable view that there are spoilers right at the mediation table who are working to water down what may lead to a fair deal for all South Sudanese.

Apart from economic interest by member states, political consideration of power should be undermining IGAD’s mediation efforts. Therefore in IGAD’s proposal leaving Equatoria Region out has a pragmatic significance, considering what is happening on the ground.

The presence of a large Dinka population in Equatoria who moved in as IDPs during the previous conflict and were not repatriated, because the present government of Salva Kiir did not show any political will to implement that part of the CPA to repatriate IDPs, and now a similar wave of the same tribe coming into Equatoria at the scale that threatens to displace and dispossess the indigenous people, appears to be working on a shared political vision between the two leaders of South Sudan and Uganda.

People in Equatoria share the same culture with those of their brothers and sisters in northern Uganda. The politics in Uganda in the light of which the northerners have a lot to complain about, seems to be similar to that which shapes the policy of the government of South Sudan towards Equatoria.

That builds a good conspiracy theory of shared interest between Salva Kiir and Museveni to see Equatoria completely suppressed just as northern Uganda suffers a similar fate.

Is this far-fetched? No. It takes a very short time in Uganda to know that the northerners are called ‘Banyanya,’ a Luganda rendering of ‘Anyanya.’

Derogatorily, the ‘Banyanya’ were portrayed as South Sudanese who formed the backbone of Idi Amin’s army. These are: Kakwa, Lugbari, Aringa, Ma’di, Acholi, Langi, Alur, Karimajong, etc.

So Equatorians and northern Ugandans are painted using the same paint brush and in the same colour. So much to worry about!

So if Northern Ugandans are reasons for Museveni to be on his toe in case one day they rise, Equatorians are the same for Kiir who cited the story of ‘Kokora’ as during the celebration of Independence Day 2014.

So, as Museveni is not in favour of a strong Equatoria, so is Kiir for a strong Northern Uganda. The reasons are obvious. It is the practice of politics of exclusion and marginalisation that causes this fear.

Unfortunately, this type of politics is entrenched in the two systems currently running in these two countries. When there is a threat to overturn it, the erstwhile beneficiaries are seriously agitated and they try to do everything to stop the change.

At this point, the apparent reluctance of IGAD to dive deeper and find a more comprehensive solution to South Sudan’s problem is not unreasonable or the result of any weakness in the regional body.

This is the result of a pragmatic political consideration, one that has been the very problem of this region from of old. It also goes to illustrate how much influence President Museveni has in the IGAD processes.

So South Sudan’s problem has a strong regional connection. It is not indeed exclusively, South Sudan’s problem. It brings the regional political and economic dynamics into focus.

If indeed true peace should come to South Sudan based on justice, equality and respect for the rule of law, then what will happen to our Southern neighbour, with whom we share culture, history and a lot more in common? Most people are aware of this fact.

Therefore, there is no naivety in simply assigning messianic virtues to all those people who sit at IGAD mediation table under the rubrics of working for peace in South Sudan. Peace in south Sudan is weighted according to individual’s political and economic interests.

These interests, not being exactly the same, by applying the rule of statistical combination means you may end up getting very many and confusing outcomes.

Some of the outcomes are directly feeding into fueling the conflict. So there is a need for genuine, altruistic, intelligent and committed South Sudanese leaders to stand for South Sudanese people backed up by the nation itself.

In conclusions, Fellow compatriots, I call upon you to stand for a great future, behind the leaders who stands for peace founded on the respect of human rights and the equality of all South Sudanese people in their cultural diversity as well as individual persons.

Rigoberto Modi

Blessed rain and old faces: Pa’gan Amum’s return to the SPLM

By James Copnall in Juba, Posted on June 24, 2015 by AfricanArgumentsEditor;

President Salva Kiir watched, motionless, as Pa’gan Amum was sworn in, and then the two men shook hands as the cameras flashed, before ululations and the customary celebratory chants of ‘SPLM Oyee’ filled the room. Shortly afterwards thunderclaps rumbled above SPLM House in Juba, and the rains began to fall: a blessing, or so many believe.

Pa’gan – former detainee, smooth-talking politician, divider of opinion – is back to what he once was: Secretary General of the SPLM. That is a surprise, and, perhaps, a sign of further changes to come; though it will, of course, take an awful lot more than this to put South Sudan back together again.

In the run-up to the outbreak of civil war in December 2013, Pa’gan was one of the most senior of an increasingly visible group of SPLM leaders criticising President Kiir. Once the bullets started flying, he and a handful of other critics were arrested, and accused of launching a coup attempt.

As emotions surged with every new atrocity perpetuated, the families of the detainees feared for the safety of their loved ones in their Juba prison.

The detained politicians insisted on their innocence throughout. Pa’gan himself said ‘if there are those who wanted to stage a coup and overthrow the government, I am not part of them neither in the past, at the present nor will I have any connection with them in the future.’

The court case subsequently collapsed. The prosecution failed to produce any convincing evidence linking the men with the violence that rapidly consumed South Sudan.

After the detainees were released, they lived abroad, carving out a political space as the G10, critics of President Kiir but opposed to taking up arms to bring about change. At various points they have been heavily involved in the Addis Ababa talks, and then seemingly cast aside.

This uneasy exile must have been extremely difficult for Pa’gan. The disciple of John Garang had spent many years in the limelight, and at the heart of the SPLM.

This was a man capable of taking Omar al Bashir’s National Congress Party on. In 2009, he led the push for the referendum act to be passed. At a critical point, he, Yassir Arman and several other SPLM leaders protested outside the national assembly in Omdurman.

The men were arrested, to huge international outcry. Days later, the referendum bill was made law. I saw Pa’gan shortly afterwards at the Presidential Guest House in Khartoum, where he and Kiir had been meeting Bashir. I asked whether he’d had a difficult week. ‘It all went exactly to plan’, he said, with a glint in his eye.

Pa’gan also won the admiration of many South Sudanese for his tough line in the post-secession negotiations with Sudan. However, the African Union mediatiors were often dismissive of the stances he took, and Khartoum was infuriated.

‘If Nhial Deng was in charge [of the South Sudanese negotiating team] we would have made a deal months ago’, one senior NCP figure once told me. But Pa’gan’s powerful evocation of what he perceived to be South Sudan’s best interests won him many supporters around his country.

Why did he fall out of favour then? Some believe he overshadowed Kiir in the Addis talks, or was seen as too willing to push his own line there. Pa’gan clearly grew frustrated with South Sudan’s trajectory too. He, along with Riek Machar and others, told Kiir he wanted to challenge him in the election for Chairman of the SPLM. There were also allegations of corruption – which Pa’gan denied.

Although many believe Pa’gan does not have a strong base among his Shilluk ethnic group (an important factor in South Sudan’s ethnicised politics) there is no doubt he was one of a handful of the most prominent national figures in the decade since John Garang’s death.

Pa’gan’s return to Juba and the party – weeks after he himself said the time wasn’t right, and after many months where such an outcome appeared impossible – is thus imbued with a certain weight. Change, of some kind, has come. The key now is discerning what sort.

After shaking hands with the President, Pa’gan addressed the press. He spoke for several minutes about the SPLM’s history, and how splits from the liberation struggle onwards had weakened the SPLM’s cause. He talked of the party’s ‘tarnished image’, a once unfeasible public self-appraisal by a senior SPLM official, now almost commonplace under the crushing weight of recent failures.

The new-old Secretary General promised that once the party had been fully reconciled, the ‘rejuvenated’ SPLM would ‘apologise to the people of South Sudan for the mistakes that we have committed, for our failures in leading the people of South Sudan, for having let the people of South Sudan down.’ This, then, was a display of public contrition, albeit for shared rather than personal failures.

Clarity on several issues is still required. As Pa’gan and his colleagues have been reinstated in the SPLM, are these previously independent critics now allied to President Kiir? Can the Secretary General of the party safely renew his criticisms of its Chairman – President Kiir – if he so chooses?

Does their return, a consequence of the Arusha negotiations aimed at SPLM reunification, herald an increased likelihood of a lasting peace agreement being signed some time soon? This, at least, seems unlikely.

The real issue remains convincing both warring parties to stop the war. The weakness of the G10, just like South Sudanese opposition parties and civil society, is just this: in the final analysis, at the negotiating table only the men with guns really count.

This is not to say the reinstatement of Pa’gan and the other former detainees cannot help matters, particularly if their return signals a willingness by the President to accept more internal dissent.

There are other possibilities, of course. Speculation is already rife in Juba that a reshuffle is on its way, perhaps after the 9th July commemoration of four years of independence. If some in the G10 have traded in their relatively free voice for positions and power, little will have been gained.

The party itself needs to change. A joke is making the rounds in Juba: ‘When the SPLM is united, it loots. When it is disunited, it fights.’ The level of skepticism about the SPLM is at an all time high; the image of the liberation heroes has been tarnished indeed.

Back in his office as Secretary General once more, Pa’gan Amum will face this and other challenges. The war began largely because of a power struggle within the SPLM. But the situation has deteriorated far beyond those beginnings. Ethnic tensions, the need for revenge, the fractures in the army – all these cannot be solved by changes within the party.

The blessed rain fell on SPLM House in Juba, but it hasn’t yet swept all the questions away.

James Copnall is a journalist and author of ‘A Poisonous Thorn in Our Hearts: Sudan and South Sudan’s Bitter and Incomplete Divorce’. He is Editor of ‘Making Sense of the Sudans’.