Archive for: July 2016

Peace Can Only Be Imposed in South Sudan

By: Justin Ambago Ramba, UK, JUL/22/2016, SSN;

The IGAD Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in the Kenyan capital of Nairobi overwhelmingly concluded that in the face of the influence possessed by the anti-peace elements in South Sudan, the only way to rescue the August 2015 Peace Agreement and guarantee that it works for the good of the country, its people and the region, is in fact to impose it!

Following the sacking of Dr Cirino Hieteng the country’s deputy Minister of Foreign Relations for representing the South Sudan’s Transitional Government of National Unity (TGoNU) at the IGAD Foreign Ministers’ Meeting which came as a huge surprise to many, only went to convince the few “Thomases” in East Africa and the rest of the continent that Juba is indeed under the control of thugs masquerading as statesmen.

In spite of the participation by the two representatives Nhial Deng Nhial and Deng Alor Kuol, both ethnic Dinka and approved by the JCE, the IGAD heads of states found no difficulty in seeing the situation in South Sudan for what it really is when they endorsed the deployment of the 14,000 strong East African Peace Enforcement troops to South Sudan.

We now know that the “One Tribe” government went on and mobilised its tribesmen to carry out those state sponsored demonstrations all across the JCE territorial strong holds.

The other proposal by the “One Tribe Dominated J1 Presidential Palace” suggesting a 20 UNIMISS body guards for the first Vice President Riek Machar only goes to demonstrate how shallow an understanding these people have of the world around them.

Everywhere in Equatoria including Juba city, the whole of Western Bahr El Ghazal and Upper Nile regions, the civilian populations have suffered targeted killings and untold scales of abuses in the hands of President Salva Kiir’s tribal militiamen masquerading as state army.

It is for the protection of these vulnerable population of women, minors and the elderly civilians that the ‘To be deployed’ Peace Enforcement forces will make the difference. They shall provide them with the much needed security.

Because in the so-called sovereign state of South Sudan a single tribe has taken upon itself the lunacy to disguise under the state established criminal syndicate infamously referred to as the “Unknown Gunmen” and hunt down other citizens in their homes, robbing them of their hard earned properties and in many cases killing them in cold blood.

When you hear of arguments of sovereignty being loudly shouted in those “One Tribe” state sponsored demonstrations in Juba, Rumbek, Bor …..etc, you know that it is not representative of the whole South Sudan.

In short, those demonstrating against the deployment of an East African Peace Force in South Sudan are the same people who at night operate under the banner of the state sponsored “Unknown Gunmen.”

The deployment of a regional security force in major towns like Juba will without doubt disenfranchise and disempower those behind the long standing insecurity in the city.

It is also true that until the “Unknown Gunmen” threatening the unarmed civilians and denying them the right to freedom of speech and expression, there is no way that the August 2015 Peace Agreement can be implemented to the letter and spirit.

A sovereignty to deny other fellow citizens their basic rights of engaging in discussions about the future of their country is a sovereignty overridden with crimes against humanity and human rights abuses thus rendering it worthless to say the least.

It is every peace lover’s relief that the African Union has finally decided to do the right thing for the downtrodden masses of South Sudan.

Their unanimously reached and adopted conclusion that, “left alone South Sudanese are never going to implement the peace agreement so far brokered by the IGAD-Plus”. This is the heart of the naked truth itself.

South Sudan’s neighbours are already overwhelmed with the huge numbers of refugees they are forced to accept every time South Sudan – “their small brother” slides back to an all-out civil war, in the words of the Kenyan head of state President Uhuru Kenyatta.

The decision to save the August 2015 Peace Agreement indeed came as the most sensible choice if South Sudan is to be prevented from sliding back to what it does best – killing and raping its own unarmed civilians.

It is absolutely the right thing to do given the region’s in-depth knowledge of the tribal nature of South Sudan’s conflict, that it came up with this benevolent decision to deploy 14.000 of its sons and daughters as part of the UN Mission in order to save what is left of what was once a promising part of the African continent.

Salva Kiir & his JCE advisors will of course be deeply angered and disappointed on hearing the news coming from Nairobi and Kigali.

Their knee jerk reaction to immediately issue a presidential decree over the state own TV sacking Dr Cirino Hieteng, the deputy Minister for Foreign Relations for having attended the IGAD meeting on South Sudan held in Nairobi and signing the communique have by all measures gone only to show to the entire world how this ‘in-word looking’ “One Tribe Supremacists” are oblivious of the world around them.

The more the “One Tribe” regime engages in those ‘hallow and shallow’ media campaigns against the idea of having a regional force in South Sudan the more they will lose the support of the neighbouring countries.

The more they continue to pay those millions of US dollars to their USA and UK based lobbyists while they continue to use confrontational attitudes in rejecting the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon’s proposal of increasing the UNIMISS troops’ military capabilities, the more the world will come to know them for what they really are.

Furthermore any attempt by Kiirites to continue portraying Dr Cirino Heiteng as an individual who didn’t really represent the Jieng Council of Elders (JCE) interests, will find themselves face to face with the realities of the new position taken by East Africa towards the war in South Sudan.

Maybe the fact that the two gentlemen, Nhial Deng Nhial, the Presidential Advisor who also doubles as the Special Envoy of the President and of course Deng Alor Kuol, the Minister of Foreign Relations in the country’s TGoNU came back from Kigali completely beaten, will open the JCE’s eyes to the new realities in the region.

After all that have happened in Juba
Let us face it! For since the formation of the TGoNU there has been well documented sequences of foot dragging and empty lip services given to the implementation of the August 2015 Peace Agreement for the Resolution of the Conflicts in South Sudan by President Kiir and his allies.

No wonder that all these have culminated into the four days shoot-out between the two forces.
Then now just tell me who out there, still in their rightful minds do not understand that the only way for implementing this embattled ARCSS will obviously have to involve a kind of enforcement from the region.

As things stand now the return of Dr Riek Machar to Juba can only happen once the responsibility of providing security in the country’s capital city including the Juba International Airport is handed-over to be manned by a third force.

This will essentially mean that the two belligerent forces relocate outside of the city and are adequately kept separated until such a time that it is deemed safe to integrate them a single South Sudan National Defence Force (SSNDF).

Also this third force is badly needed now than any other time before to provide protection to the civilian population, NGOs, their staff and facilities.

After all these third force will be contributed by the neighbouring countries of Ethiopia, Sudan, Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda, giving it the advantage of the saying “Love your neighbour as you love yourself.”

Author: Dr Justin Ambago Ramba. Reachable at: ambagoramba@hotmail.co.uk

Who’s to blame for the political violence in South Sudan? What’s the way forward?

By: Professor Mahmood Mamdani, Makerere University, Uganda, Posted on TheEastAfrican, Jul/16/2016, SSN;

IN SUMMARY: “Political violence requires a constituency and raises more difficult questions — among them, how to isolate the perpetrators of political violence from their supporters.”

Since Independence Day in July 2011, South Sudan has fallen rapidly into strife and disarray. Tensions erupted in the capital, Juba, at the end of 2013 and spread to three large provincial cities.

By the following year, thousands were dead and the AU had appointed a five-person commission of inquiry, chaired by former Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo.

The commission spent several months in South Sudan. When it delivered its findings in 2014, I was the only one of five members who dissented.

In the official report, the violence in South Sudan was characterised as mainly “criminal,” but in a minority view entitled A Separate Opinion, I argued that it was more than a breakdown of law and order.

Rather, the violence was political. Criminal violence is the action of individual perpetrators, to which the response is simply to judge and punish.

But political violence requires a constituency and raises more difficult questions — among them, how to isolate the perpetrators of political violence from their supporters.

To begin to answer these questions, we need an accurate description of what happened.

Ethnic lines

Two main ethnic groups dominate South Sudan: Dinka (the larger group) and Nuer. Juba is settled along ethnic lines, and the killings in the capital at the end of 2013 — by Dinka militias — were organised as a house-to-house operation in Nuer residential areas.

The political objective was to cleanse Juba of its Nuer population, divide the inhabitants of the country along ethnic lines, and destroy any basis for consensus, polarising 11 million citizens in the new state into us and them.

A displaced person in a UN compound told the commission: “They put a knife into what bound us, turned the crisis from political to ethnic.”

By “they” was meant the government that assumed office at Independence; the crisis turned ethnic at the end of 2013 after an explosive meeting of the National Liberation Council (NLC), the executive committee of the ruling party, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM).

The tension had been simmering throughout 2013 and rose dramatically when three members of the NLC announced their intention to contest the chairmanship, a position that would automatically qualify its holder as the ruling party’s candidate for the presidency in the upcoming 2015 election.

In April, the presiding NLC chair and President of South Sudan, Salva Kiir, who is Dinka, removed the executive powers of his vice-president Riek Machar, who is Nuer.

In July, Kiir dismissed all his ministers and then embarked on a tour of the Bahr el Ghazal region in the predominantly Dinka northwest, delivering provocative speeches that were broadcast on the national TV network. By the time he called for the NLC to meet on December 14, the stage was set for a showdown.

The killings in Juba lasted until December 18 and left hundreds of Nuer dead, but who carried them out? The most widespread explanation among senior military, intelligence, police, and government officials we talked to was that they were the work of several thousand irregulars recruited during border skirmishes with Sudan shortly after Independence.

The people who carried out the killings from December 16–18 were mostly from Bahr el Ghazal.

Nuer communities in Juba responded to the killings with a rebellion and a local uprising. Community-based fighting formations outside Juba known as the White Army, 50,000 in all and fresh from a run of campaigns against the Murle ethnicity in 2012, converged, first on Bentiu, which they ransacked, and then on Juba.

An intervention by the Ugandan army halted the march of the White Army. At the same time, the UN Mission opened its compound to protect IDPs from hostile forces on the government side.

Both the Ugandans and the UN were credited at first with reducing the level of violence, even preventing a genocide; later, both were accused of prolonging the crisis — the Ugandan army because it propped up the government, and the UN Mission because it turned a blind eye to armed IDPs in the camps.

There are two major examples of secession in post-colonial Africa: Eritrea and South Sudan. Eritrean Independence followed a military victory against the regime in Addis Ababa, but there was no military victory in South Sudan. External factors militated in favour of South Sudan.

Madeleine Albright’s decision to back SPLM against Khartoum in 1997 was a child of Washington’s war on terror. Only a reasonable fear that it could be the next target of US aggression in a post–9/11 era that had begun with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq explains why the government of Sudan agreed to hold an independence referendum in the South and let half the country secede.

The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), signed in 2005 when the South gained autonomy from Sudan in preparation for full independence in 2011, turned out to be a shoddy affair.

In spite of opposition from some regional states to a short five-year time table, it was rushed to the table by a Troika of Western states—the United States, the United Kingdom, and Norway—once it was clear that Washington’s interest in the Sudanese civil war had forced Khartoum onto the defensive.

Without the threat of US intervention against an African country identified as an enemy in the war on terror, Khartoum would not have signed the agreement.

Who determines terms of peace?

The CPA’s lamentable approach to the array of armed groups in the future state of South Sudan was based on the assumption that only those with the capacity to wage war have the right to determine the terms of the peace.

The most alarming consequence of the agreement was that non-militarised political opposition, both in Sudan and the country that was about to come into being, was thoroughly marginalised.

Enthusiastic voices from the rest of the world, in particular the Troika, reinforced the illusion of the new regime, led by Kiir, that all it needed to ensure its continued hold on power was international support.

It basked in the extenuations that the world now grants to victim cultures: the south, when it was part of Sudan, had been terrorised, starved, bombed, and brutalised, and it follows, as it does for post-genocide Rwanda, that whatever happens next, the victims in charge of their own destiny must be coddled and absolved of responsibility.

In Sudan six years ago, the regime in Khartoum was roundly and correctly accused of fraud when it took the country to the polls. But in South Sudan, the rigging of the referendum on self-determination, which produced a 99.8 per cent Yes vote, was approved with a cheerful smile by the international community.

Two years later, when the ruling SPLA appeared to split more or less down the middle—each half intent on devouring the whole—the Western press was mystified.

It had always commended the “Christian and animist” victims in the South against their “Muslim and Arab” oppressors in the North, and now reached for an equally formulaic explanation for the outbreak of civil war in the victims’ new territory, where all was supposed to turn out well.

The new formula was an old one: “Tribalism.” The ethnic nature of the split in the National Liberation Council was the best to hand: It was, after all, a standoff between Nuer and Dinka. From this point of view, the current conflict, which has continued since 2013 and led to deaths estimated in the thousands, is between a Dinka-led government and a Nuer-led rebellion.

Who should be held responsible politically for the extreme violence that has destroyed lives of hundreds of thousands in South Sudan since December 2013?

Two groups above all. First, the Troika of Western states, and its friends such as IGAD, for their decisive role in framing an agreement that set up a politically unchallenged armed power in South Sudan.

Second, the pre-July 2013 Cabinet of the Government of South Sudan for the political crisis that led to the political meltdown on December 15, 2013.

The regional organisation of states, Igad, and the UN Security Council representing the international community have patched together another makeshift agreement to stop this round of fighting in South Sudan.

The agreement has three key features: A coalition government based on a sharing of seats between the two sides to the civil war; a demilitarised Juba which will be the seat of this government; and an agreement to have a hybrid court try all those considered criminally culpable for the mass violence during the civil war.

The obvious dilemma with this agreement is that those likely to be tried are the same as those who hold power.

With this in mind, Salva Kiir and Riek Machar have written a joint op-ed in the New York Times proposing that there should be no trial but a reconciliation premised on forgiveness, though Machar disavowed the op-ed four days after it was published, claiming not to have been consulted about its contents.

From the point of view of both Igad and the troika, this proposal may be the least costly way forward. But it is unlikely to hold the key to a stable future.

An alternative way forward would require greater political will, more resources and a more radical vision from all parties concerned.

It calls for a recognition that the transition that was the CPA failed; that it fed the worst anti-reform tendencies in the SPLA and turned into a breeding ground for the violence that erupted in December 2013.

South Sudan needs a second transition. Instead of giving political power to those with the gun, this transition will seek to forge a political compact both at the level of society and that of the political class. It will seek to combine political justice with political reform.

Political justice is about political accountability, at both the individual and the societal levels. Key to the pursuit of political justice will be the exclusion from high office of all those politically accountable for the mass violence that followed the crisis of December 15, 2013.

Key to political reform will be demilitarisation and democratisation at the societal level so that the process of reform of militias at the local level goes hand-in-hand with that of creating self-governing democratic communities.

The demilitarisation of Juba is a starting point; for it to continue, demilitarisation will need to extend beyond Juba to most of the country.

The challenge in forging this transition is political. Is it possible to put together a political authority with the credibility, the vision, and the experience for a task that combines elements of tutelage with that of a democratic project?

For this, I suggest a hybrid political authority led by an African team—the most likely being the AU’s High Level Panel on Sudan (both North and South), chaired by former South African president Thabo Mbeki—backed up by the joint authority of the African Union and the UN.

Prof Mahmood Mamdani is the director of the Makerere Institute of Social Research, Kampala, Uganda.

RE: URGENT DEPLOYMENT OF THIRD DETERRENT FORCE & ARMS EMBARGO ON SOUTH SUDAN

South Sudan Human Rights Society For Advocacy

21 July 2016,

From outset, Your Excellencies in your respective capacities, we urge you to act and act now, do not listen to any one who opposes this saving action to be done by a third deterrent force and good effects of arms embargo on South Sudan. Your determined and courageous action is needed more than ever before for the suffering South Sudanese people and we hope your decision prevails too soon.

APPEALS:
(i) Immediate deployment of the third deterrent force
We the undersigned South Sudanese human rights and civil society organisations under the secretariat of South Sudan Human Rights Society for Advocacy(SSHURSA) welcome the quick decision taken by the African Union, IGAD and the region to deploy in South Sudan a third deterrent force to be under the United Nations Mission In South Sudan(UNMISS). Truly, this force will help calm the raging violence in the country. This is the right decision entirely in the interest of the suffering South Sudanese people.

We congratulate the AU and the IGAD countries for the decision to deploy in South Sudan such a third force. We greatly thank you; the EU, United Nations, Troika Countries and the rest of the members of the international community in supporting the deployment of this regional force. Your continued support and desire to see a peaceful, democratic and reconciled South Sudan give a glimpse of hope to the voiceless and suffering South Sudanese communities in Juba and countrywide. Our people yearn for peace but our leaders have failed them and the recent violence in Juba, clearly communicates a message of a failed leadership and determination to destroy the Peace Agreement which the parties signed.

Our great gratitude goes to the countries; Kenya, Ethiopia, the Sudan, Rwanda and Uganda for accepting to contribute such a force to be deployed in South Sudan. Your action is timely needed.

Your Excellencies, we add our voice to the ongoing measures your good offices are taking. We thus, with urgency, bring to your kind attention the following recommendations which we request your good offices to continue giving uncut support so that South Sudan is quickly saved from another civil war which will lead to its disintegration.

RECOMMENDATIONS(WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN):
1. moving from paper to action hence timely deployment of the third deterrent force in Juba. The force must be well equipped, large in size and competent, capable of defending itself, institutions of the Transitional Government of National Unity(TGoNU), civilians and their property in Juba and in other parts of South Sudan and in UNMISS protection of civilian sites.

2. deployment of the same third deterrent force after Juba, in other major towns of Malakal, Bor, Bentiu, Wau, Maridi, Yambio, Mundri and Torit to protect civilians and offer same protection to the public and private institutions and property. These places have been too, marred by violence.

3. timely and continued full support and funding of this third deterrent force so as to make it capable of executing its protection mandate, efficiently and effectively.

(ii) Timely approval to impose arms embargo on South Sudan:
Your Excellencies, additionally, we kindly request your immediate action and support for the arms embargo to be imposed on South Sudan.

With the deployment of a third deterrent force and arms embargo in place, your support shall have reduced or neutralise the belligerent elements of South Sudan; be they the forces of the armed Opposition or those under President Salva Kiir. This will reduce violence because the source(arms) that partly encourages violence shall have been curtailed.

We urge you, your Excellencies to engage with any country which is opposed to this initiative. They are not the ones suffering but South Sudanese are and therefore, no one should listen to anyone opposing a justified cause for South Sudanese people.

Why we make this appeal to your offices:
Your Excellencies; South Sudan has reached a climax and at the apex of its collapse. The question is not longer whether there should be peace in South Sudan but rather whether South Sudan holds together as a country.

With that in mind, Your Excellencies, we are very much convinced that it is only the regional and international intervention that will ensure the smooth implementation of the August 2015 Peace Agreement.

It is the common concern of putting measures in place to ensure the implementation of the Agreement that will preserve dignity and rekindle hope in the face of our suffering people. Nothing else but your action will help save South Sudan from disintegration and now is the right time act.

No more trust between principals:
There is no doubt, after the recent violence in Juba, trust in terms of security between the two principals (Salva Kiir and Riek Machar) has died off. Without a third force, these two leaders will never ever come and work together again in Juba. This will give a room to warlike military generals and some politicians whose dislike for the Peace Agreement caused the recent well planned and executed violence in Juba.

It is important for your offices to act because as far as we know, there are military generals and tribal think tanks in South Sudan who have not been happy with the peace Agreement signed by their leaders. They detest the accountability provisions enshrined under Chapter V of the Peace Agreement, specifically; the provision of setting up a Hybrid Court for South Sudan to stamp off impunity.

Your Excellencies, it should be more emphasised to your good offices that; South Sudan is in total anarchy; the forces of destruction are well prepared to execute their scheme of destroying South Sudan.

They will oppose the deployment of the third deterrent force because this will neutralise them and prevent them from carrying out their heinous acts on South Sudanese people. We urge you not to give in and strongly go forward to save South Sudanese because signs are clear that another looming civil war is at hand unless your offices act courageously and forcefully, quickly to rescue the situation of our people.

The armed force under President Salva Kiir is neither an army of national character nor the armed force under the First Vice-President Riek Machar is anything near that name.

The armed forces in South Sudan instead of protecting civilians; but rather reduced themselves to committing outrageous acts such as:
• raping and dehumanisation of women and girls(various reports and field interviews indicate).
• Targeting civilians on the basis of their ethnicity as outlined in various human rights reports.
• killing, arbitrarily arresting and detaining journalists and any person with critical voice against the unlawful behaviour of the security and military apparatus(Refer to recent murder in Juba of Internews Journalist John Gatluak Manguet Nhial and continued detention of Juba Monitor Editor Alfred Taban)
• Pillaging, looting and destroying public and civilian property. The recent violence in Juba again clearly brought to light such continued behaviour of the army as public and civilian property became a target. The property and items of UN agencies were looted in Juba city.
• Attacking of UN personnel, its premises and civilians under the UNMISS protection(since 2014 to the recent violence in Juba, UNMISS premises attacked, see attached Civil Society and human rights organisations’ report: ‘we have dignity, we are humans; we need help’).

Why this appeal is important:
The third deterrent force will act as buffer zone between the belligerent forces and prevent violence against civilians, civilian property, UNMISS premises and other humanitarian agencies being harassed countrywide by the elements of the army, military intelligence and security apparatus.

The third deterrent force will also help prevent the violations of human rights and international humanitarian law as it will contain the indiscipline elements of the army and armed opposition.

Your action of imposing arms embargo will lead to peaceful South Sudan as the strength of perpetuating violence through false belief in using heavy arms to gain victory will be reduced.

Finally, we again urge your offices to act timely to save South Sudan. Any delay in efforts to save South Sudan, is an opportunity for evil forces to triumph. Never listen to innocent civilians who are mobilised to participate in politically-motivated demonstrations against the deployment of the third deterrent force and arms embargo on South Sudan.

Those who demonstrate have been brainwashed to the point of participating in matters that contribute to their own sufferings. The people, should instead, demonstrate against the continued violence, insecurity, abuses of their rights and lack of basic necessities of life such as food, clean water, shelter, medical and healthcare facilities in South Sudan.
Thanks Your Excellencies and South Sudanese people are looking forward to relying on your quick remedial and rescue action. We hope your offices remain seized of this matter to its implementation.
Sincerely,
Signed:
1. South Sudan Human Rights Society for Advocacy(SSHURSA).
2. Goodhearted Orphaned and Disabled Organisation(GODO).
3. Institute for Rights of Women(IRW).
4. Centre for Peace and Reconciliation(CPR).
5. Young-Adult Empowerment Initiative (YEI).

To:
Chair, African Union’s Peace and Security Council(AUPSC);
President Alpha Oumar Konare; the African Union’s Special Envoy to South Sudan;
The Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development(IGAD);
President Festus Mogae; Chairperson of the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission(JMEC);
President of the United Nations Security Council;
Secretariat of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights;
Secretariat of the European Union(EU);
Secretariat of East African Community(EAC);
The Troika Countries;
President Jacob Zuma; the President of the Republic of South Africa;

For follow up and more inquiries on this appeal, you may contact us through our representative.
Cc:
Parties to the Peace Agreement—SPLM/A-IO and SPLM-IG, FD/SPLM leaders and other political parties;
President Jekaya Kiwete; Chair, Chama Cha Mapinduzi, Tanzania’s ruling party;
Foreign Embassies in the Republic of South Sudan;
Speaker of Uganda’s Parliament;
Uganda’s Parliamentary Committees on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Human Rights;
Chair, Kenya National Human Rights Commission;
Acting Chair, South Sudan Human Rights Commission;
Chair, Uganda Human Rights Commission;
Director, Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, South Africa;
Professor PLO Lumumba;
Donald Deya; Chair of Pan African Lawyers’ Union(PALU);
L. Muthoni Wanyeki; Africa’s Amnesty International Regional Director;
Gilbert Onyango; Africa’s Regional Representative, Universal Periodic Review;
Human Rights Watch’s Africa Regional Director;
East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project;
Lawrence Mute; African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, South Sudan Focal Point;
Dr. Willy Mutunga; former Kenya’s Chief Justice;
Chaloka Beyani; Human Rights Council’s in-charge of internally displaced persons;
Kenyan human rights and Civil Society groups;
Uganda Law Society and Uganda Civil Society groups: HURI-Net Uganda, Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment(ACODE), Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa, African Centre for Treatment and Rehabilitation of Torture Victims, Refugee Law Project, Human Rights Network for Journalists Uganda and others.

E-mail: sshursa2007@gmail.com; www.sshursa.org; Tel: +211 922 355 200, Juba, South Sudan

Note:
We kindly urge persons and institutions copied and those not copied in this letter to push for this call in any strength they can. Your voice counts a lot to save South Sudan. The common cause to protect human dignity unites us. Join and support us in speaking out for those who cannot speak for themselves.

Will South Sudanese accept foreign Tutelage government?

By: Ater Garang Ariath, JUL/20/2016, SSN;

As South Sudan struggles to gain its own ground as a sovereign state, foreign tutelage is on rise in different forms and fronts with an intention of robbing South Sudanese people in broad daylight. What Unrealistic world led by imperial and capitalist elite states?

The United Nations (UN) led by elite states intention to invade South Sudan sovereignty and integrity is not about South Sudan leadership crisis but about South Sudanese resources, of which super power capitalist states set their eyes on.

The focus of capitalists since political crisis upsurge in our country is on how to mobilize other states under United Nations springboard as ready ground to drive their own agenda of robbing South Sudanese resources, which are the hearts of the ongoing foreign tutelage violent in South Sudan.

This is critical time for all South Sudanese people to rise above their tribal cocoons and protect national integrity by all possible means, if unrealistic call to bring in foreign troops without prior knowledge of the South Sudanese people materialize.

The spirit of nationalism that inspired million South Sudanese dead and alive to fought for independence struggle must be revisited by all of us, despite which group, we, you and I belong in this senseless conflict.
It’s enough and enough for us to let national cohesion drive us together as South Sudanese people against foreign tutelage government or interference.

The national cohesiveness should be embraced in order to takes hold in the consciousness of our people, especially foreign-bought South Sudanese nationals should reconsider their positions and wrong path that they have taken against their own country sovereignty and territorial integrity.

However, the cajolement, the wheedling, the seduction and Trojan horses of neocolonialism activities in South Sudan advocated by capitalist global institution like of (UN) must be stoutly resisted.

At personal level, I strongly agree with one of Pan African founding leaders, who said “neocolonialism is a latter-day harpy, a monster which entices its victims with sweet music”.

The capitalist or imperialist states far face serious economic and social difficulties too compared to us, which they are interested to loot our resources under the ticket of UN trustee flagship.

The political action plans designed by UN members of capitalist states are aimed to supplement agenda of regime change in our country, which is a red-line to jump over by foreign forces.

The leadership in South Sudan was brought to power by South Sudanese people, and will only be changed by South Sudanese people without influence of foreign states.

The ongoing war since inception in South Sudan was designed by foreign nations and use shallow -headed South Sudanese nationals to execute it for them.

Nevertheless, if God is with us as South Sudanese people, supporting our integrity and sovereignty then, we together will turn the UN stumbling block into a stepping stone.

The war wage by South Sudanese enemies of peace and progress can soon be an opportunity for us to committed for excellence, as we struggle to bound into single unit as South Sudanese people.

Our determination to build standing institutions, army, communication network and articulated educational system in our country, will only be realized if we rise above our personal ambition and abandon uncalled for rebellion.

The current war in our country is deeply influenced by the foreign presence in different forms, while carrying activities that definitely undermine national characters of the nation.

In order to be able to carry out this resistance to neo-colonialism at every point, Positive action requires to be armed with an ideology of South Sudanization, an ideology which, vitalizing it, and operating through a mass party with a regenerative concept of do it ourselves.

The leadership under SPLM should forge for it a strong continuing link with our past and offer to it an assured bond with our future. Under the searchlight of an ideology, every fact affecting the life of a people can be assessed and judged, and neo-colonialism’s detrimental aspirations and sleights of hand will constantly stand.

In order that this ideology should be comprehensive, in order that it should light up every aspect of the life of our people, in order that it should affect the total interest of our society, establishing continuity with our past, it must be socialist in form and in content, which meet our interest as African people.

South Sudan is a country of contradictions, many believed, full of promise for growth, modernity and progress, yet shrouded by political, social and cultural matters that undermine its quest for identity and integrity fueled by foreign hands behind its scene of conflict, which is so dangerous to our future as
sovereign state.

This is time for the leadership under SPLM to provide cohesive ideology to command the loyalty of all South Sudanese against unwanted influence of foreign nationals in country political affairs.

We, as nation have potential Generals within ranks and files of our national army and other organized forces to inspire the majority of South Sudanese people against UN quest of power in South Sudan.

Hence, emancipation of South Sudan is equally emancipation of other African resources rich nations, from imperial western countries, which always create mayhem wherever they chooses in order to give them chance to loot underneath minerals.

Our politicians who support intervention of UN forces lacked deep analytical mind, which so vital in political game and the current crisis in our country needed political ruminative thinkers.

Albeit, intervention of UN forces is an affront to our pride and sovereignty, as country, which cannot go unchecked.

“A patriot must always be ready to defend his/her country against foreign influence that jeopardize national characters and pride.”

The consequences of the South Sudan government’s violence

BY: ELHAJ Paul, JUL/20/2016, SSN;

The implosion of SPLM/A with its factions in Juba from 7th July 2016 to 11th July 2016, was not an unexpected thing. That it would happen was not a matter of if, but when, and indeed it happened much earlier than expected. South Sudanese warned the world and kept beating the alert drums consistently, but all these as usual fell on deaf ears.

The chairman of Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission who should have heeded the warning certainly ignored the messages and now we have chaos in the South Sudan.

Now that things have slightly settled down following the cease fire, it is time to do some thinking on the whole thing. In this process it is important to acknowledge the pains inflicted on the country by actions of a grossly negligent government.

All of us the South Sudanese in one way or another are deeply hurt by loss of loved ones, and traumatised by witnessing the savagery in Juba that went on for those four days. For those of us who survived the Juba carnage of 1965, this brutality awakens a deeper and hidden pain in us.

What makes it worse is that the Juba Carnage happened on exactly the same day: Friday 8th July. Note everything is the same except for the year.

As a survivor of that grave crime against the people of South Sudan, I have sadly come to accept that extreme evil exists in all societies. The naive and racially biased judgement we doled out to the Arabs was full of ignorance. For the savagery of President Salva Kiir’s government far exceeds what the Arabs had done in South Sudan.

This piece attempts to examine the consequences of the South Sudanese government’s violence against its people that has thrown the country into chaos.

If President Kiir, the Jieng Council of Elders and their Chief of the army General Paul Malong Awan Anei thought that by attempting to assassinate Dr Riek Machar they would strengthen their political grip on the country, they no doubt must have miscalculated.

With or without Dr Machar their half baked plan would not bring peace. If anything it would lead to further destabilisation of the country.

It is not rocket science to work out that if Dr Machar disappears from the scene the Agreement for Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan (ARCISS) would still have to be implemented. What then is the point in trying to assassinate Dr Machar, if this is not personal tribal hatred?

In the process of this evil plan, the government has plunged the country into a crisis inviting possible foreign intervention to the government’s dismay. The United Nations response to the crisis in questions appears to be heading in that direction.

Now there are three variant perspectives competing to shape the future of South Sudan. The first is made up of those who strongly recommend trusteeship as the only solution to address the chronic failure of leadership in Juba.

The second group is made up of those who advocate partial intervention to save ARCISS, and the third group is made up of supporters of the government who do not support intervention of any nature. If anything they want President Kiir to continue with violation of ARCISS to appoint a Machar replacement.

The advocates of trusteeship include Professor Mahmood Mamdani, Dr Remember Miamingi, Dr Lako Jada Kwajok and others. This group has made a compelling case that can not simply be brushed aside.

Mamdani in his YouTube video, ’South Sudan was not ready for Independence’, thinks that “politically this authority [South Sudan] should be led by somebody who has both the experience, and the vision, and the confidence of everybody concerned.

In my [Mamdani’s] view there is one party, which is the AU High Panel in the Sudan led by former president Thabo Mbeki.” (https://uk.search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&type=B214GB642D20110806&p=south+sudan+was+not+ready+for+independence)

Although Mamdani’s argument is powerful for the case of trusteeship, his conclusion quoted above falls short of acknowledging and accepting that there are capable South Sudanese who can actually competently with confidence lead South Sudan, for example, Fr Paride Taban.

Dr Miamingi in conversation with Ivan Okuda of the Monitor newspaper under the heading, ‘South Sudan as a state was still born’, equally makes a powerful case of intervention for a hybrid administration consisting of local and foreign people.

He sums it as follows: “This country has failed and won’t work unless the following happens: first, an international military intervention to secure the country and protect civilians.

Second, the replacement of the failed government in Juba with a hybrid administration of South Sudanese technocrats supported by our brothers from the region and international community. This transitional arrangement will reconcile, heal, foster accountability, restore order, hand it a constitution and after that process organise elections with guaranteed sanity.” (http://www.monitor.co.ug/Magazines/PeoplePower/South-Sudan-as-a-state-was-stillborn/-/689844/3298006/-/rv8c42/-/index.html)

Dr Kwajok expressing the view of the majority of South Sudanese in his article titled, ‘United Nations Trusteeship is the best option to resolve the crisis in South Sudan’, points out that “There is a growing consensus among a significant number of South Sudanese that supports UN takeover of the country until it’s able to function as a viable state. A 5-year period under UN Trusteeship would give the country the chance to start afresh on sound foundations.” (http://www.southsudannation.com/united-nations-trusteeship-is-the-best-option-to-resolve-the-crisis-in-south-sudan/)

The second group wants to see the implementation of the peace agreement resume with both President Kiir and Dr Machar working together. The group consist of the United Nations, IGAD and the Troika.

The Secretary General of the United Nations, Mr Ban Ki Moon advancing this view in his response to the crisis recommended to ‘the Council (UNSC) to take action on three fronts:
=== impose an immediate arms embargo on South Sudan,
=== enact additional targeted sanctions on leaders and commanders blocking the implementation of the peace agreement, and
=== fortify UNMISS with “desperately needed” attack helicopters and other material to fulfil the mandate to protect civilians.’ (http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=54434#.V41JaNQrLs0) Equally both IGAD and the Troika called for the same. (http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article59587)

The third group is that of the government and its supporters who want the status quo to continue. The Jieng Council of Elders is already issuing out threats against any intervention. Please see, ‘Dinka Council of Elders warns war over additional UNMISS troops’, (https://radiotamazuj.org/en/article/dinka-council-elders-warns-war-over-additional-unmiss-troops). This group should be ignored. They have already failed spectacularly and they have nothing to offer the country.

Those arguing for trusteeship no doubt have made strong and valid points that South Sudan one way or other needs to be pulled out of the mud it is deeply stuck in.

Their recommendations however ignore a hidden reality in South Sudanese politics, which is that the country actually has knowledgeable and competent leaders to lead it, the reason these leaders have not surfaced is because of SPLM/A’s violence towards leaders from other ethnicities.

They have not asked the question: Is it true that South Sudan does not have the necessary leaders? If they did, they perhaps would have come up with the right answer.

Mamdani’s recommendation is outright contemptuous of South Sudan and its people. He parachutes Mr Mbeki as the qualified person to fix South Sudan without taking into consideration that leaders like his nominee, are currently failing South Sudan.

What have the foreigners with impeccable governance credentials appointed to manage the current agreement done? Are they any more of a success than the failed South Sudanese leadership? How has the implementation of ARCISS led to chaos under their watch?

All the signs for impending troubles were in their face, what did they do? Mamdani presents a paradox himself in his video where he acknowledges the failure of the international community.

On the other hand, placing hope on ARCISS and spending energy to salvage it is a dead end. It will not work. What is needed now is for the two perspectives of those supporting intervention to be merged to give birth to a totally new approach that breaks the backbone of the cancer – SPLM/A with its various factions once and for all, in order for peace to come to South Sudan.

Therefore, the international community as recommended should intervene to separate the SPLM-IG and SPLM-IO and demilitarise the capital. Once the capital is demilitarised and security is restored, the intervention force takes over the security of the capital for the entire duration of the interim period.

This should then be followed by the dissolution of the Transitional Government of National Unity of President Kiir and Dr Machar.

A national Unity conference should then be organised composed of all the registered parties, registered civil societies, faith based groups, and the Diaspora supported by one of ‘The Elders’ (www.theelders.org), preferably Kofi Annan with the main objective to choose a new transitional government whose agenda includes the main provisions of ARCISS.

This new administration must be a product owned by the South Sudanese people, to dispel the propaganda of the JCE and their song of sovereignty aimed at elevating themselves fraudulently. It also should avoid the shenanigans and bias of IGAD Plus during their mediation of ARCISS.

South Sudan’s parliament should not play any role in this process because:

1) It is not a legitimate body. All the MPs like President Kiir himself were not voted in by the South Sudanese people in an independent South Sudan.
2) They failed to play their role in holding the executive to account since 2005.
3) A good number of the MPs are nominees of the already proven failed leaders that have plunged the country into the abyss. The people of South Sudan through the mentioned organisations should now make the decision of who should run the country on behalf of the people.

In conclusion, South Sudan has been hijacked by the SPLM/A, and it has been abused to an extent that the only way out now is partial intervention.

If the international community truly wants to support the people of South Sudan as it claims, then they need to provide the needed security and safe environment for South Sudanese to exercise their collective sovereignty. This surely is not much to ask for…

[Truth hurts but it is also liberating]
Elhag Paul
elhagpaul@aol.com

Jieng Council of Elders’ pre-plan: To arrest, harm & celebrate Dr. Riek Machar’s death on 9th July, 2016

By: Bol Khan, JUL/18/2016, SSN;

The pre-plan designed by Jieng Council of Elders’ leadership in Juba was to arrest Dr. Riek Machar on Friday 8th July 2016 at J1, harm/murder him and then celebrate his death on Saturday 9th July 2016. This was what the later details transpired. The details transpired that the postponement of Independence Day Celebrations was not done out of the blue.

It wasn’t a normal postponement as such! The primary plan was to divert the public’s attention from what the Administration’s Legislative body, the Jieng Council of Elders, had already worked on & cooked: A plan to arrest and harm Dr. Machar before Friday 8th July 2016.

Yes, the prime reason as reported was a financial hardship which had earlier on badly hit the Council led-Government of Salva Kiir. This became known to everybody. However, the Jieng Council of Elders (JCE) in collaboration with the administration also thought of how they could get Riek Machar in an official corner so that they arrest and permanently harm him.

Thus, the council’s executive body led by Salva Kiir Mayardit on 8th Friday July 2016 was acting on its legislative body’s directives.

I have concrete evidences sent to me by an insider in the administration. Had this pre-plan succeeded on Friday 8th July 2016, a little budget reserved by the administration would have been used to celebrate Dr. Machar’s death instead on Saturday 9th July 2016.

Accordingly, as directed by the council, President Salva Kiir called Dr. Riek Machar for a meeting at J1 on Friday 8th July 2016. While on the other hand, the council also directed its military wing to send extra force as soon as Dr. Machar arrives at J1, State House.

Indeed, when Dr. Machar arrived at J1 on Friday 8th July 2016, the forces that would start fighting were immediately sent by the military wing under the leadership of Malong Awan. A huge forces which Ateny Wek, Salva Kiir’s spokesperson and Akuei Bona Malual, J1 Council’s Representative to the UN later described as “unknown gunmen” appeared from the Headquarters and opened fire on Dr. Machar’s bodyguards.

Paul Malong was nicknamed by the Administration as “King Paul” for having successfully masterminded 15 December 2013 genocide in Juba, Wau’s mass murder in June 2016 and many more atrocities he planned, instigated and executed.

Primarily, the Jieng Council of Elders’ forces took for granted that they would easily chase away Dr. Machar’s unit in three minutes time on Friday 8th July 2016.

Primitively, they only looked at Machar’s protection unit as was very small, without taking into account guards’ nationality and that fighting those natural bravest bodyguards was not as easy as withdrawing cash ($ USD) from South Sudan Central Bank (SSCB).

The council’s forces also thought once they start fighting, Machar’s gallant unit would be easily wiped out or even during the fighting, perhaps Riek would come out running, cowed, crouched or cringed in fear. Or might come out either to see what was happening or see his bodyguards’ whereabouts.

Instead, Machar small unit force made the opposite happen. That fierce fighting took place between unequal forces and Dr. Machar’s bodyguards humiliated the council’s forces instead. The two forces fought until when a third party, the UNMISS separating forces came. And reportedly, this was where the council’s members could start blaming each other for the failure to arrest and finally harm Dr. Machar.

On Friday night when the council’s prominent members realized that their designed pre-plan failed then they went back to the drawing board. Where they freshly start strategizing how they could again get Dr. Machar after the failure of a calculated assassination attempt at J1.

The Council leadership could not sleep for those two consecutive nights, i.e. Friday & Saturday nights. Desperately, they agreed to launch an open and direct attempt on Dr. Machar and his protection unit comprising of only one thousand-three hundred and seventy (1,370) servicemen.

They resolved that “All the available weaponry or military hardware currently in SPLA’s possession including helicopters gunships would be used against Machar and his forces on Sunday. Hoping, ordering over thirty (30,000 excluding unified police) to fight and crush Machar would have resulted into rounding up, arresting and permanently harming him.

Perhaps, by launching both ground and aerial bombardments attacks using heavy artillery plus helicopter gunships may result into a whole elimination of him and his forces.

On Sunday morning, 10th July 2016, SPLA launched fierce offensive ground attacks and then followed by aerial bombardments on SPLM-IO’s two bases, wishfully hoping to hear that Dr. Machar got killed in combat.

The multiple attacks which were coming from different directions were all beaten back at best by SPLA-IO’s protection and support units. A war which was initially set to take only two hours lasted for five good days between over thirty thousand (30, 000) Jieng Council of Elders’ troops and only one thousand, three hundred and seven (1,370) strong servicemen of Dr. Machar. While Machar’s small forces were using only slight machine guns e.g. AK47, RPGs and few PKMs compared to modern weaponry and military hardware including helicopter gunships the SPLA were using against Machar’s forces.

Congratulations Dr. Machar’s gallant forces!! With this unequal number of forces and military supplies the two armies had in mind, if you made SPLA-IO’s troops to be thirty thousands (30, 000) and SPLA-IG’s troops as only one thousand, three hundred and seventy (1,370 ) troops in Juba. What do you think would have happen therein?

Could Jieng Council of Elders still roving around maiming ordinary citizens, today in Juba? I don’t think. Hence, Malong and Council’s cronies must not proudly talk today in Juba as if theirs was braveness. They are not!! If they think they are, can they accept two equal forces with equal military hardware in Juba? Will they?

Willingly, and to avoid further clashes, the SPLM/A-IO’s forces had to voluntarily decide a tactical withdrawal from its two bases on Monday evening.

When Jieng Council of Elders heard this, the council’s online and blanket Ambassador, Gordon Buay Malek, quickly posted a white lie on his facebook account saying “SPLM-IO’s Chief of Staff, Gen. Gatwech Dual, IO’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Administration & Finance, Gen. James Koang Chuol and perhaps Dr. Riek Machar were all believed to have been confirmed dead during series confrontations between the SPLA-IG &SPLA-IO forces in Jebel Kujur”.

Gordon Buay is a South Sudan’s Jieng Council of Elders trivial, self-imposed representative to the United States of America. Gordon’s name was not included in South Sudan’s Ambassadorial list; so he has no fixed basic salary in the Council’s pay roll.

He depends only on wage; he earns a living by making up information and reports this hoodwinking information to the Council, JCE, so that he is given something to eat at least for a day. His (Gordon Buay) payment depends on how much information he made up or how many lies he makes/levels per day against Dr. Riek Machar’s character. This is how he survives all these years since late 2013.

Back to the topic, so the notorious Jieng Council of Elders’ deadly but failed pre-plan was to murder and celebrate Dr. Machar death on date 9th July 2016. Even if the executive branch of Jieng Council Elders managed to arrest and permanently harmed Dr. Machar on Friday 8th July 2016 at J1, the offensive attacks which were later launched on Sunday 10th July 2016 against the SPLA-IO would have all been suspended.

What they would have been busy doing was the celebrations. This was evidently transpired and was ascertained by the following two factors: 1) The celebratory sporadic firing of guns into the air allover Juba on Monday night was of this fact that they thought what Gordon Buay uttered about the alleged killings of Gen. Gatwech Dual, Gen. James Koang and Dr. Machar were true.

Some Jieng’s Community members automatically became arch enemies of Dr. Machar in 1990s when He, Dr. Machar challenged the SPLM’s first objective/vision of Secular, United, and One Sudan. Additionally, as a result of that long-established tribal incitement, which has later on been spread by some Jieng Elders for years now, about almost sixty-five (65) percent of today South Sudan’s Jieng Community, wish to see Dr. Riek Machar’s corpse placed into a grave.

From that year, Jieng Community (with more or less) began to believe that as long as Dr. Riek Machar still exists on this planet South Sudan cannot and will never be a stable country. Without complimenting Him (Dr. Machar) for having opposed that unachievable United Sudan Vision in 1991. Gluttonously, they also forget that what they are enjoying today in Juba was Dr. Machar’s brainchild.

Lastly and not the least, in my capacity as the said Council regime’s survivor, I would like to add my voice to those whose voices might have reached you, Dr. Machar, earlier on. About how you should be cautious or stay alert regarding these evil acts of Jieng Council of Elders.

Naturally, ninety (90%) percent of this Jieng Council of Elders-led Community knows very well how to set a political, coordinate and eliminating evils plans. Let’s not forget that, the organized terrorists always have millions tricky ways to achieve their evil and deadly plans every time, anywhere and at anytime.

Bol Khan can be reached on bolkhan39@yahoo.com

Understanding Gen. Paul Malong Awan: The true nationalist & unfairly maligned savior of South Sudan

By Simon Yel Yel, Juba, South Sudan, JUL/18/2016, SSN;

In Western diplomats’ imagination, General Paul Malong Awan is a life-battery for President Salva Kiir’s presidency; Presidential wheel driver; dictator and the fanner of the war. For Western sympathizers, he is the murderer of the Nuer, Dinka emperor who wants to build Dinka political hegemony, corrupt, antagonist and awaiting heir who will inherit the presidency once president Salva Kiir retires or dies.

However, General Malong have risen and stood tall above these caricaturist descriptions during the recent five days fighting in Juba.

Gen. Paul Malong Awan was in the bush long before the emergency of the SPLM/A in 1983. Like other war veterans, Malong abandoned his own Anyanya two movement in Northern Bahr el Ghazal and successfully mobilized and led thousands of youth to Ethiopia, Bilpham in 1984.

Malong was so passionate about the love for his country and detested the suffering that the people of southern Sudan were subjected to by the then Sudanese government.

During the liberation war, Malong almost fought in every corner of the then Sudan. He was the commander of the forces that had managed to vigorously defeat the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) on several attempts to recapture Jebel Boma. Malong protected Jebel Boma in 1992 until he was transferred to Northern Bahr el Ghazal to protect civilians from constant raiding attacks from Murahaleen.

From 1990’s up to the time of CPA, Malong was the commander in charge of all the SPLA forces in Northern Barh El Ghazal, Gogrial, Raja and other towns. Gen. Malong fought the bitter war with Mujahedeen, Murahaleen and the forces of Sheikh Abdelbaki Ayii Akol. He protected the civilians and properties from SAF until the CPA was signed.

After the comprehensive peace Agreement was signed, Gen. Malong didn’t opt to join politics but remained in the army as the country’s deputy Security chief. He was posted in Khartoum. He had a belief that the only viable option for Southern Sudanese to survive from socio-political marginalization from the North is to vote for secession and hence he had to make sure he gathers all intelligence plans for the SPLM/A.

In 2008, Gen. Malong was appointed by President Salva Kiir as a governor for Northern Bahr El Ghazal state on the request of the people of Northern Bahr el Ghazal. For the four years that Malong spent in the gubernatorial office, things he achieved in Aweil speak better for themselves than for me to explain them.

When Riek’s bloody quest for J-1 reached the highest peak of “shoot to lead” in Dec 2013, Malong unreservedly took his AK-47 and joined the SPLA forces to jettison out Riek’s forces in Juba and consequently dislodge him in Bor. He was the only leading high profile figure who fought in Bor liberation war from Riek.

In April 2014, President Salva Kiir appointed Gen. Malong to be the SPLA chief of General staff on request of the public. Malong accepted the appointment and left his gubernatorial position and took up a very challenging job of defending the country.

As he took over the work as the SPLA chief for General staff, a remarkable enigma surrounds General Malong. Who is he? What does he want? How does he want to fight Riek’s rebellion and transform the SPLA?

Only people who see things beyond tribal line will dare not ask those questions because there are sufficient accounts of goals achieved by Gen. Malong.

For those who were unable to watch Malong on Thursday night on SSTV a.k.a SSBC, his speech on that night serves as a useful guide and full definition of what human being he is and what is he up to.

Relaxed, reasonable, well-informed, nationalist, savior, the Malong who appeared on SSBC was far from the purported reckless murderer, dictator and Dinka emperor.

On his Thursday night appearance on SSBC, Malong said, “when I joined the SPLA liberation war in 1980s, my goal was to achieve this great nation and protect all the citizens regardless of their creed, tribes, faith, political affiliation and regions. There are those who would want to inculcate the fear in our people that I am in a planning to kill Equatorians, I Therefore want to assure the Equatorians and indeed all South Sudanese that my mission as the SPLA chief for General Staffs is to protect the sovereignty and territory of South Sudan from external and internal aggression; protect the constitution and more importantly to protect the lives and properties of all South Sudanese from any danger or harm whether from inside or outside” he added.

Watching Gen. Malong on that Thursday night feels like watching history being made. Despite the relentless propaganda aimed to emasculate his reputation, his star continues to rise.

When the political history of the post-independence and dark days brought upon the country by Riek Machar’s rebellion at the behest of the U.S.A and UN is finally recorded by our generation, Gen. Paul Malong will no doubt be recognized as a great hero who tremendously transformed the SPLA into disciplinary army and protected the civilians, constitution and sovereignty of South Sudan.

Indeed, he will be remembered as a man who brought to end Riek’s political philosophy of “shoot to lead.”

Gen. Paul Malong is following the same path undertaken by President Salva Kiir. When the SPLA bifurcated in 1991 and late William Nyuon who was the chief of General staffs rebelled, huge responsibilities fell on Salva Kiir as he assumed the role of Chief of General staff until 2005.

Similarly, when the SPLA went into bad deep dichotomization in 2013, then quite unexpectedly, President Kiir put Gen. Malong at the helm in Bilpham in April 2014. Within a period of two years from then, Malong turned what was viewed as a tribal army into a national army and indeed made SPLA to be one of the strongest army in the region.

I firmly believe that the current state of affairs, nationhood and political sanity in South Sudan will prove to be having been preserved as a result of sudden appearance of Gen. Paul Malong.

The strong military foundation mechanism put into place by Gen. Malong will one day prove to have salvaged the SPLA from disintegration and the nation from collapse.

Under the stewardship of Gen. Malong, the SPLA has become the last and only front against the foreign exploitation; the only front against any individual who wants to use the national army as a mean of ascending to J-1; the only front against external aggression that threatens the existence of South Sudan as a nation and its prosperity as a people; the only front against any individual who wants to subject the lives of citizens into suffering to pursue his personal interest; the only front against foreign intervention into South Sudan’s affairs; the only front that protects the constitution and sovereignty of South Sudan.

In conclusion, I dare the reader to imagine what the political and military state of South Sudan would be like today without the existence of Gen. Malong in Bilpham and President Kiir in J-1.

What Malong and his team achieved in Bilpham during these two years in my opinion are history’s turning points.

Simon Yel Yel is the co-editor of President Salva Kiir’ speeches and essential writings published as “Salva Kiir Mayardit: The Joshua of South Sudan” he can be reached at maandeng2017@gmail.com or +211955246235.

Response to the deplorable violence in Juba: South Sudanese Community in UK

Issued By: The South Sudanese Community in the UK

Date: 14 July 2016

We, the South Sudanese Community in the UK, condemn in the strongest possible terms, the deplorable and entirely avoidable violence that has occurred in Juba between 8th and 11th July 2016. The shooting and the shelling has been indiscriminate, with little regard for collateral damage, in what is our most populous city.

Thousands of families were forced to flee their homes in search of safety. Thousands more families spent desperate days and nights, without food and water. It is too early to know the full scale of civilian and military casualties, but we expect the number to be high. Widespread looting, by undisciplined gunmen, further compounds an already dire situation.

We welcome the cessation of hostilities declared by President Salva Kiir and First Vice President Dr Riek Machar.

The people of South Sudan are left with no confidence in the leadership of our country. The leadership of the transitional government of national unity (TGONU) has failed to deliver on its promise to bring peace to South Sudan. They have shown a lack of commitment in implementing the provisions of the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (ARCISS). They have squandered the nation’s wealth, building unwieldy and undisciplined military forces. They have demonstrated that their assertion of control over these forces is only pretence. Instead of tackling the deep economic crisis that has driven so many ordinary South Sudanese to hardship, the civilian and military leadership of the TGONU has chosen to prioritise militarism, brinkmanship and mutual recrimination.

Since 2005, the political leadership of the SPLM in South Sudan repeatedly demonstrated that they have no aptitude for governance. They must step aside and give others the opportunity to move the country away from a destructive militarism that is at the heart of our nation’s turmoil. We need a leadership that is committed to peace and prioritises reconstruction and development.

For South Sudanese

We urge our fellow South Sudanese to take bold action in the interests of peace, and to urgently:

Reject divisive rhetoric that only serves to push our communities apart, when we should be working to bringing ourselves together;
Consider new leadership for the country;
Recommit to the provisions and schedule of ARCISS, as our only credible path to a sustainable peace;
Demilitarise our nation’s capital, the state capitals, and all other municipalities;
Respect the role of Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission (JMEC) under the leadership of H.E. Festus Mogae.

For the International Community:

We thank the international community for their swift condemnation of the violence in Juba, and urge them to act decisively to prevent the collapse of the peace agreement. We welcome the United Nations Security Council decision, which requests the African Union member states send a regional peace-keeping force to South Sudan to protect civilians. We ask our peace partners to:

Follow through with the demand for a regional intervention brigade. We object to any foreign forces that are not mandated by the United Nations;

Impose an arms embargo on South Sudan;

Impose sanctions on individuals and entities who are obstructing the implementation of the peace agreement;

Provide humanitarian assistance to the needy who have been affected by the conflict.

We ask our peace partners to work with the people of South Sudan as we tackle the challenge of stabilising our nation, and support us to realise our aspiration of a peaceful, harmonious and progressive society.

SIGNED:

Federico Awi Vuni
Chair, Equatorian Community in the UK

Karlo Kwol Akol
Representative, Chollo (Shilluk) Community in the UK

Peter Gaere
Representative, Western Bahr El Ghazal (Fertit) Community in the UK

United Nations Trusteeship is the best option to resolve the crisis in South Sudan

BY: Dr. Lako JADA KWAJOK, UK, JUL/16/2016, SSN;

To many South Sudanese, the 9th of July each year is a day for joy and magnificent celebrations all over the country. There is nothing unusual about such expectations in a day that marks our independence following a protracted war that resulted in massive losses of human lives, material, and a consequent underdevelopment of the country.

People were filled with dismay following the cancellation of the 2016 anniversary because of lack of funds. But never in a million years did anyone envisage that the gates of hell would open in South Sudan on the very day it gained its independence.

The deadly clash outside the Presidential Palace (J1) in Juba on Friday 08/07/2016 was the final nail in the coffin of trust between the two parties; SPLM/A-IO and SPLM/A-IG. The triggering event was the killing of Lt. Colonel George Gismala and Sgt. Domach Koat Pinyien on 02/07/2016 by elements of the National Security Service (NSS) and Military Intelligence (MI).

From there, the tension between the two sides escalated significantly and culminated in a further shooting incident on 07/07/2016. It was obvious to sharp observers that SPLM/A-IG has opted for war and the shooting of the two SPLM/A-IO military men were the first shots in it.

In the aftermath of the carnage at J1, President Kiir stated that he does not know who was behind it. Reports indicate that a large force came from nowhere and attacked the SPLM/A-IO guards deployed outside the presidential palace.

It appeared to be a coordinated attack with the presidential guards already positioned outside J1 joining the “unknown force” in the fight against SPLM/A-IO guards. Only a person with remarkable naivety would believe that President Kiir has nothing to do with what happened.

Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt, how could the attack on SPLM/A-IO headquarters and Machar’s residence the next day, be explained? Is there anyone on planet Earth who believes that thousands of army troops supported by artillery units, tanks, and helicopter gunships could launch such a major offensive without the blessing and knowledge of the Commander in Chief?

The regime, in its moment of madness never spared a thought for the consequences of its actions. Suppose Kiir and his supporters succeeded in wiping out the entire SPLM/A-IO leadership – what then? Would South Sudan attain a lasting peace?

The regime seems to hold the erroneous belief that its problems are caused by certain personalities, therefore, neutralising or liquidating these individuals would pave the way for the consolidation of its rule over South Sudan.

But it’s up against the reality that the overwhelming majority of the people are behind the opposition, hence, there will never be any shortage in filling up any vacant leadership position.

The fact that these ugly events took place around independence day, sent a message to the whole world that South Sudan lacks responsible leadership. Those who have been sceptical regarding South Sudan becoming an independent state now feel vindicated.

However, the fact of the matter isn’t that the South Sudanese communities are incompatible with each other or unable to coexist peacefully. They have been living together as tribal communities neighbouring each other for centuries.

There hadn’t been any hostilities in our ancient past on the scale we are witnessing now. The majority of the populace are law-abiding and peace-loving people.

The unfortunate reality is that the country is being misruled by a bunch of sadistic leaders who do not give a damn about the future of the country.

Self-enrichment through rampant corruption, targeting of political rivals and adherence to a divisive policy on ethnic lines are the reasons that landed the country in the current predicament. The regime has utterly failed in all aspects of good governance.

Calling it a government is a sort of a misnomer as there is no government in the world where civil servants, teachers, university lecturers and soldiers do not receive salaries for 3 to 4 months. It even resorted to the medieval practice whereby soldiers are allowed to rape and loot as part of dividing the spoils or payment for their services.

There is a difference though as the victims in the medieval era were subjects of conquered countries and not citizens of the same country.

Not long ago, India today TV station and several news outlets reported that the government of South Sudan sanctioned its soldiers to rape and loot as payment for their salaries. These abominable acts were confirmed by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and several relief organisations – what a disgrace!

The second misnomer is the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) which is said to be the national army of South Sudan. The name itself creates a paradox as on one hand South Sudan chose secession from Sudan and on the other it continues to use the name that relates to Sudan.

The SPLA is anything but a national army. It’s composed overwhelmingly of one ethnicity, the Jieng, making it a tribal army. It lacks discipline, training, structured chain of command and standard rules of engagement. It often resorts to looting, destruction of properties and extrajudicial killings.

Following the recent ceasefire in Juba, the whole world witnessed how the SPLA ransacked Juba markets, private homes and properties belonging to citizens. Even the UN World Food Programme (WFP) central warehouse in Juba was not spared by the unruly SPLA soldiers.

The WFP has been delivering vital services to the needy population of South Sudan and presumably saved many lives.

What took place is not the behaviour people would expect from a national army. Those soldiers brought nothing but shame and disdain on South Sudan.

We must remember that President Kiir and the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) lost legitimacy on 09/07/2014. Signing the Agreement on Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan (ARCISS) restored their legitimacy for the purpose of implementing the peace accord.

Apparently, the recent hostilities have dealt ARCISS a fatal blow. Anyone who thinks that there is hope in enacting ARCISS is only burying his or her head in the sand. It’s time to consider other avenues that could rescue the South Sudanese people from an imminent catastrophe.

There is a growing consensus among a significant number of South Sudanese that supports UN takeover of the country until it’s able to function as a viable state. A 5-year period under UN Trusteeship would give the country the chance to start afresh on sound foundations.

During the said period it would be possible to establish an inclusive system of governance and develop equitable government policies. The international community should avoid being complacent as it’s not in anyone’s best interest to allow the replication of the Rwanda’s horrors.

Those who are concerned about the breach of the sovereignty of an independent state must understand that a failed state has no sovereignty. Even from the citizens’ perspective, it has no value when the state fails to deliver essential services, uphold the rule of law and promote peace and harmony between its communities.

Moreover, with the growing influx of refugees across the borders to the neighbouring countries, South Sudan has become a destabilising entity in the area and a real threat to regional security.

There is an urgent need for a pre-emptive intervention by the UN to save lives, prevent massive population displacement and avert widespread famine.

Dr. Lako Jada Kwajok

Equatorian Police not to be issued machine guns, as many of them killed by Dinka colleagues

JUL/16/2016, SSN;

Latest reports from people ground, it’s now been revealed that during the three days fight which started on July 8th, between president Kiir’s army and his first vice-president Machar’s SPLA-IO, all the Dinka in the National Security services maliciously participated instead in the killing of their Equatorian co-workers.

It’s now reliably revealed that the Equatorian National security officers were shot at the back in a devious Dinka plan to eliminate most of their Equatorian colleagues.

Furthermore, it has been exposed that Lt.General Saeed Abdul Latif, the Dinka Commissioner of Police in the dominantly Bari-speaking Jubek State, with Juba as its headquarters, has given an Order that all the Equatorian policemen and women should be totally prohibited from possession and carrying of automatic Machine guns.

Only the Dinka members in the Jubek State should be the people carrying such automatic weapons.

This order is utterly surprising given that the minister of national Security in the Kiir’s government in Juba is an Equatorian himself by the name of Lt.Gen. Obutu Mamur.

More developments will follow….