BY: ElHag Paul, South Sudan, MAY/17/2013, SSN;

The hedonistic, unholy and belligerent three decades old sacred cow named Oyee has become haunted. Demons of divisions and greed have taken over its psyche and it has also infected the hearts of the two top shepherds. The cow’s behaviour has become erratic. It is confused and keeps wondering aimlessly. Things are no longer good. To save the animal and the Luak (cow shed), the shepherds have agreed to recruit the representatives of God on earth to exorcise the ghosts before the cow destroys itself.

The shepherds since the birth of this particular cow have not believed in modern methods of animal husbandry. The rules of good animal management were frowned at and despised. This cow was allowed to forage freely through people’s fields and whoever complained got the stick. As is the norm in life, living things get socialised to a certain way of doing things and once these habits take hold it is not easy to forsake them.

Little did the shepherds know that the unruly behaviour of their beloved cow one day will create a huge problem among them in the luak. So long as the cow grazed on other people’s fields and produced milk, they were content on reaping the benefits without thinking about the destruction that this cow caused on people’s fields and lives.

I remember way back at home when my mother used to tell us (my siblings and I) stories in the evening around the fire place (colourful stories about the ‘fox’, the ‘hare’ and the like). I always looked forward to evening time for these enjoyable funny stories. With hindsight now I know that my mother was doing a great job of educating us and preparing us for life as adults in the community.

These fire place stories serve a number of purposes, they equip the mind with essential knowledge necessary for survival, they build loyalty in relationship, they strengthen love between children and parents and shape lives making people to think in a responsible way towards the well-being of the community.

Those unfortunate ones in the community who did not benefit from such exercises lost important aspects of good upbringing. The reason why societies have delinquents may be traced to lack of appropriate socialisation.

Each culture has a way of imparting essential and desirable norms and values on its members from an early age. Some cultures are good and others are wanting. Those with wanting cultures often are the source of problems in some societies and it becomes necessary that the wider society must take responsibility to rescue such groups from themselves by re-educating them for the greater good lest the whole society self-destructs.

Which of course means animal breeding too involves a similar process to enable the cowboys and cowgirls to adequately manage them properly in their farms for better profits. In the advanced countries, even pets are reared in such a way as to inculcate acceptable norms in them. For instance, the owners of dogs and cats in advanced countries communicate with their animals and the latter in turn respond to the former to keep the peace.

Otherwise, without good rearing, dogs and cats would be causing havoc by biting people all the time. Rarely except in the wild, can one find an animal in the community behaving as it wants without control and here is where the cow named Oyee comes in. It is exactly, the prototype of the poorly bred and uncouth animal with inbuilt traits of self-destruction.

Soon after its birth three decades ago, the owners instead of imparting acceptable norms and values on it, they relentlessly conditioned it to be aggressive and thoughtless. It was taught not to respect rules. It was taught to be ruthless. “Inshalla abuk wadi talaga” translating into ‘shoot anything regardless including your own father’. It was only nurtured as a killing machine and indeed it has turned out to be exactly so.

It is very easy to talk or inculcate killing into things. Pulling a trigger or slaughtering a human being like the sad case of Banyjioth Matoat Tap may be an act of few minutes, but the consequence lasts with the dehumanised brute for life. A life that gets taken over with nightmares and mental disturbance often silently nursed by this dead soul living.

If bravery means foolery, self-destruction and dehumanisation (the return to the world of savagery), then perhaps the ‘cowards’ have won the battle of the day as the future looks certain to be bright for them.

Now, Oyee afflicted by this terrible disease is even unable to manage or care for itself. The concept of ‘care’ is totally alien to it. Since it achieves pleasure by hurting and destroying its own, it gets confused when told to be considerate of the sanctity of life. As far as it is concerned, pleasure is achieved from usurping power, robbing, looting, and killing.

At this crucial juncture, only weeks away from its thirtieth birthday, the shepherds have called in the men of God for help. The cow is going crazy and the two top shepherds are at each other’s throats. The blames are mounting with each shepherd lamenting the state of the cow. Even at this late stage, neither of the shepherds can see that approaching the vets may be the solution. They are convinced the cow is haunted and the panacea is with the men of God.

Approaching the vets is not a preferable option for the shepherds because the panacea may involve modern prescription involving unpalatable medications, restrictions on the cow and possible re-arrangement of the ‘Luak’ with change of the shepherds themselves. As the cow is now mentally affected, it would not be difficult for the vet to see that the shepherds themselves are contributors to its predicament and if so they should not be allowed to perpetuate the conditions that have driven this supposed sacred cow to this unfortunate situation.

The shepherds aware of such a possible diagnosis from the vets decided the best course of action is to let things as they are. Neither of them wants to lose the cow. For life without milk is unthinkable. So they resort to profusely blaming each other for the way the cow was brought up.

Both have become irrational in that they are incapable of seeing that they are actually responsible for the state of the cow and neither of them has any knowledge and skills of cow management. Yet, like 2 year olds self centred egotistical children oblivious of their environment, they just want to carry on inflicting more damage. Unbelievable but that is the reality in the Luak.

As the story about the cow’s health and the division between the shepherds spreads like wild fire in the Luak, and the inhabitants of the Luak get concerned, the shepherds have now approached the representatives of God on earth to intervene. As expected, the spiritual leaders being wise men and tactful knowing that both shepherds are hopeless and that the cow itself being old and ill, there is nothing to be salvaged here. They would have preferred to recommend ‘starting from scratch’ which would entail the humane putting down of this terminally ill cow.

Nevertheless, knowing the atrocious behaviour and the unpredictable temper of the shepherds and the importance of preserving life, they engage in philosophical talk praising both shepherds highly – calling them men of peace and referring to the cow as healthy and the Luak as calm, stable and prosperous. These praises are dished out with razzmatazz even when the shepherds are snarling at each other with frightening display of anger.

Wittily, the spiritual leaders steer clear of exorcising the cow. It is not important and it is unworthy given it’s old age and the nature of its possession by the demons. The economics of saving a possessed slow dying cow in spiritual terms is not worth the work involved. Therefore, it is silently and intriguingly with sweet praises left to perish alone as its days are numbered.

The demon initially manifesting itself as mental disturbance in the cow and now that the men of God are out of the way, it has comfortably taken full possession of the cow and fiendishly attached itself to the shepherds. As enemy of peace in the Luak it is speeding up the whole process of atrophy. Although this seems dire, for those who fear God this is the beginning of the good news because it signifies the coming of the saviour (the Messiah).

Knowing the dire situation prevailing in this difficult last days, the representatives of God on earth are now profusely on daily basis praying for the ‘Luak’ to ensure that when the end comes to this possessed unsalvageable cow the demons go along with it leaving the ‘Luak’ cleansed for coming of the Messiah with people of peace singing hallelujah loudly.

The shepherds now possessed like the cow itself are bickering with each other with their supporters fragmenting themselves with accusations and counter accusations of betrayal. Determined not to lose the milk in the interim period prior to death of the cow, each has resorted to consulting the powers of the dark to outwit the other for total control of the cow’s management (The very evil powers that has possessed them).

In the far corner of the Luak, another interesting development takes place. Three mini shepherds equally possessed assigned the responsibility of rearing three of the 10 goats in the Luak are agitated and like the three witches of Macbeth (Shakespeare) are meeting bemoaning the murky weather conditions. They warn the ‘Luakians’ forecasting horrendous weather in the days to come. They prophesy that their goats may be trampled-on in the big fight of the beasts unless something is done. The bickering shepherds each knowing that they through their cow had plundered the luak just like General Macbeth had done with the demise of Duncan the day of reckoning is about to come.

Perturbed, and besieged by the thoughts of the impending catastrophe, the shepherds reluctantly and desperately are courting the three mini shepherds of the three goats as the only hope. Without support of these midgets once considered useless beings in the Luak, neither of these competing shepherds can survive in the interim period. Whichever one of the shepherds that wins the support of these midgets will emerge as the victor in the meantime to manage the cow and also milk it without any accountability.

Ironically, the fortunes of these oppressed and supposedly coward mini shepherds of the three goats suddenly have become extremely important in the survival of anyone of the possessed ‘brave’ shepherds. One wonders whether these midgets are aware of this accidentally pivotal position of powers? If they are, will they extract maximum benefits for themselves before the death of the cow?

Since the cow has foraged freely in their pens with impunity depriving the goats of pasture, will they now trade their support for maximum benefit of the goats by strictly demanding for:
1) properly demarcated pens where they are the masters to ensure that the cow does not return to forage freely.
2) de-restriction of their abused brother.
3) equitable distribution of the milk in the Luak.

If the shepherds refuse to these demands, will the midgets withhold their support to both and instead vie for management of the cow itself in the interim period? After all, the three goats exactly make a third of the Luak. Mathematically they stand equal chances in a contest. Such an act will expose the fallacy of numbers but will the midgets detect this?

In the meantime, with the murky weather building up, let us together with the representatives of God on earth pray for coming of the Messiah. Oh! God save the Luak. Amen

[Truth hurts but it is also liberating]

Elhag Paul
elhagpaul@aol.com

BY: Chol Ajak Demac, ARIZONA, USA, MAY/15/2013, SSN;

Lately, I have been monitoring the political development in South Sudan and I am in awe on how fast the situation is deteriorating and how fast the SPLM lost and will continue to loose grounds as a national political party! Things may get worse for the South and the SPLM, unless miracles happen.

There have been a lot of talks lately on how best to govern South Sudan, some are calling for Federalism others are calling for centralism and few are for I don’t care party!? Without taking sides on which is the best way to govern the South, one can only be concerned in the way the debate is being carried out. For example last week in Juba the greater Equatoria region, on their extraordinary conference, called for a federal system of governance.

Today we learn that the greater Bhar el Ghazal is due to hold their extraordinary conference in Wau from the 15th to 20th of May this year and who knows? Greater Upper Nile may hold it conference soon (who’s better than who?)

Now here are the questions:

1- Is it best to tackle the problems of politics and governing the country by going regional? Did we try that before? Where did we end up in the past by going regional on the issues of national interest? “Those who fail to learn from the history are doomed to repeat it” or “he who lives to forget his past lives to die of his past.”

Knowing the past and keeping the past helps us to shape the future, and may avoid the re-occurrences of past disasters.

2- One can’t help but to notice that all the leaders of so-called regional conferences are seniors SPLM members. That begs the question: did the SPLM fail as a party to hold these kinds of conferences?

Why can the SPLM organize the conference that have nothing to do with who should or shouldn’t be the Chairmen but rather debate and come out with the solutions on how best to run the country, keeping in mind that the SPLM had been the ruling party for the last 8 years?

3- Others may say that they tried all the above within the ruling party and failed for one reason or another!!! I don’t have any inside information to agree or disagree with them, but I can’t imagine that their failure is due to where they hailed from or which region they came from.

In such a case the problem of how to govern South Sudan shouldn’t be regionalized, but rather nationalized in terms of Political parties.

In short, if the SPLM fails you, you quit and form a party that calls for federation in the South and I bet you will find a lot of supporters from all corners of the nation.

4- Some may ask why worry about the regional-driven politics? To be candid, it doesn’t worry me when a region gets together to address problems in the region such as insecurity in the area, because of the tribal and inter-tribal conflicts, or tackles the issues of developments in the private sector or agriculture improvement.

Most of you will agree how urgent the South is in need of such conferences!! I only worry when we try to use the regions to score political points at the national level for these reasons:

A- Although the intention may be good, there are always a few who will try to hijack the situation and misuse it to farther their self interest will can result in dividing the Country on the regional line and tribal politics.

B- With all due respect, our people are still young when it comes to politics that include the so called intellectuals (the roots of most problems in RSS), therefore if we base our political demands on the region instead of party platform, we are risking further divisions among our people, and the words of our national anthem “Land of great abundance, Uphold us united in peace and harmony,” will be things of the past.

C- Let’s all assume that Bahr el-Ghazal calls for centralism in their upcoming conference. And the Upper Nile calls for either centralism or regionalism. Are we not setting up the country on the path of civil war based on regionalism? But if we do it based on the parties platforms then each party will have supporters in every town, city or region of the nation, and that can lead us towards more unification of our nation.

Finally, it is my hope that when it come to discussing the national issues we should always try to keep our emotion away from it, and have some intelligence deliberations .

Last but not least, on my open letter to Mr. President Kiir Mayardit, published on August 3, 2011, I asked him the following question: Are we going to be the beacon of light and hope in Africa or the laughing Stock of the World?

Fellow citizens of Republic of South Sudan, I’m appealing to your better nature to try your level best in answering this question, and ask ourselves what kind of Country did we really fight for and dreamt about??

May Almighty God guide us towards being a peaceful and democratic Nation, so God bless South Sudan

Chol Ajak Demac, Former Secretary General of SPLM Chapter in Arizona State. (USA) and can be reach at chol.ajak@gmail.com

BY: Tongun Lo Loyuong, FINLAND, MAY/13/2013, SSN;

One is truly left bemused when one reads statements against the assignment by President Mayardit of the church to lead the reconciliation process in South Sudan. As such in light of our apparent muddling through pertaining to our reconciliation efforts in South Sudan, it seems timely to put this issue to bed, and make the case for reconciliation as the mandate of the church, and to inform ourselves about the doctrine of reconciliation or salvation in the Christian faith tradition, which justifies this mandate.

Some cynics remain doubtful of church reconciliation mandate, and declining of any genuine reconciliation outcome in South Sudan that is led by civil society and faith-based institutions. They argue that the church should not have been assigned to spearhead a process that is meant to redress what are strictly governance and political challenges related to past atrocities and current political failures.

Because the problems are political in nature and scope, and have not been created by the church, they cannot be resolved by the church, but by political actors, so goes the two wrongs make a right reasoning. In other words, it is argued that political actors should be the ones cleaning their own mess beginning with the President himself.

What I find utterly debilitating is that, some of our brothers, even those with no expertise and academic authority to speak on the issue have weighted in their un-informed opinion. Some continue to cry over the spilled milk caused by the withdrawal of the delegated powers to the Vice President to spearhead the reconciliation process. Few have started opinionating under several authorship names by the same individual promoting the same argument, to create a false impression that the view is shared by multiple thinkers and analysts.

Such an undertaking only amounts to multiple personality disorder and blatant academic dishonesty. Are these people actually serious about contributing to South Sudanese efforts of wanting to build a nation and a just state or are they rather in need of serious psychological help and counselling?

Not that I am against the Vice President Dr. Riek Machar. I actually admire his political maturity and the progress in character he has made since the tragedies that befell our people during the 1990s. The Vice President’s issuing of public apology to the Bor people for his potential role in the 1991 massacre takes a lot of courage, and reveals remorse and change of character that can only signify that there is a change of heart from his part.

In fact I wouldn’t hesitate voting for him, or for President Kiir or whichever candidate. As is the case with most South Sudanese, we are swing voters who need to be persuaded through a political agenda that outlines strategies for good governance and service delivery.

In this sense, I will cast my ballot even for the devil, as long as the fundamental rights that guarantee my dignity as a human being are protected, and the policies that are being pursued are downwardly accountable to the people to better our life and create a peaceful just and prosperous nation.

As the age-old adage attests, “to err is human and to forgive divine.” But the Vice President is not the right man to lead the reconciliation process, precisely because he is seen as a lead actor in the ongoing conflict resulting from the 1991 division in the liberation movement.

I am all about freedom of expression and the protection of the basic human right of access to information among other fundamental human rights that safeguard our dignity as human beings as enshrined in our Transitional Constitution and regional and international bills of rights and conventions. However, freedom of expression must come with utmost responsibility. Not anyone who has learned few English words can just write some rubbish under the pretext of free expression, without any expertise and authority in the area about which they are opinionating.

If I cannot resist commenting on a specific policy issue, I must be an authority or an expert on the subject, or at least be familiar with the literature and debate about it, or have rich experience with issue, in order for my views to count. How can such un-informed views of some of our opinionated brothers constructively contribute to our nation-building aspirations?

It is very unfortunate that in South Sudan today even the cattle herder from the village is purporting to be a public policy analyst and opines on governance issues in the Republic.

While I agree with most informed views that identify the numerous challenges confronting our fledgling state as strictly political and related to issues pertaining to the (mis)governance of the land, I disagree that the church must be separated from the state, particularly as it relates to the national reconciliation process and other issues of social and economic service delivery.

After all it is common knowledge that throughout our history the church has always served as our peace broker, and often assumed the role of our true government not only in relation to our spiritual and moral management, but also in terms of delivering services.

Why then are we now trying to keep the church off the loop, and render its rich experience and expertise of sustaining us for decades irrelevant, particularly as we strive to reconcile?

Shockingly, the view that reconciliation mandate is the exclusive function of the government and political actors to the exclusion of the church and other civil society stakeholders, seems to be shared by non-other than the new chair of the reconciliation committee, his most reverend Bishop Daniel Deng Bul Yak himself.

To my dismay, during the recent handover of the national reconciliation documents to the new committee by the Vice president, Bishop Bul is quoted as saying that reconciliation is not the sphere of the church. “The field I am coming into is not my field; it is not a religious field,” reserved the Bishop (Sudan Tribune, May 5, 2013).

I would like to think that Bishop Bul was being humble, and that he did not mean what he said by declaring that reconciliation is not an area of religious expertise. Else one is left speechless and wondering about where the Bishop received his theological training from and whether or not he is up to the task. If reconciliation is not the function of the church, I don’t know what is.

Even a catechumen or a casual lay reader of the Christian faith tradition will know that the grand narrative of the Christian faith is reconciliation, and therefore the church mandate is to primarily moderate the reconciliation of humanity and the world to God, and with ourselves. This understanding of the Christian Gospel as centered on the reconciliation mission is shared by the overwhelming majority of Christian faith practitioners and theologians.

For example, the prominent twentieth century German Protestant theologian, Karl Barth, concluded in his “Church Dogmatics” that reconciliation is the core of the Christian message. In the Christian message of reconciliation or “Versohnung” in German, Barth argued, “we enter that sphere of Christian knowledge in which we have to do with the heart of the message received by and laid upon the Christian community, and therefore with the heart of the Church’s dogmatics.”

It is true though that the term reconciliation originates from secular Hellenistic settings to describe ancient political realities and processes seeking to amend ruptured societal relations caused by some form of political injustice inflicted on a political community. On the individual level, the term also references efforts to address tensions in interpersonal relationships.

In the Hellenistic world therefore, the Greek form of being reconciled “dialassomai” is a compound of the Greek verb “allasow” which means “to exchange,” and derived from the Greek adjective “allos” which means “the other.” Reconciliation as understood this way, is meant to exchange other or be in each other’s shoes so to speak, in order to understand and ameliorate each other’s grievances and pain.

“The words thus carry with them the sense of exchanging places with ‘the other’, and therefore being in solidarity with rather than against ‘the other’.”

Reconciliation, is therefore the practice and process of “overcoming alienation through identification and in solidarity with ‘the other’, thus making peace and restoring relationships,” as John W. de Gruchy aptly contended in his book “Reconciliation: Restoring Justice.”

While the grand narrative of the Christian faith speaks of reconciliation using its cognates, such as salvation, redemption, atonement, or even justification, the Bible and Christian traditions also explicitly speak of “reconciliation” as such, as our moral and spiritual goal.

For example, the gospel according to Mathew attributed reconciliation as an integral moral message of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, even more important than offering prayer and sacrifice to God. “So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift” (Matt. 5:23-4).

As is the case with most of his theological explications in the New Testament where he consistently incorporates concepts from Jewish traditions and Greek philosophy and vocabulary, Apostle Paul is credited with importing the secular Greco-Roman reconciliation term into the Christian square to elucidate on the salvation history of the Christian faith in the language and reason of his targeted audience—the Gentiles.

Thus the term reconciliation, which only occurs 15 times in the New Testament, is almost exclusively found in Paul’s letters. In his letters to the Roman and the Corinthian Churches, Paul uses the metaphor of reconciliation in emphasizing the contrast between hostility and peace, and love and hate (cf. Rom. 5:1-12; 8:31-9; and 2Cor. 5:14-21). In 2Corinthians particularly, Paul exposes reconciliation as the means for being newly created in Christ, and as the righteousness of God and the mission of the Church.

However, what makes the Pauline understanding of reconciliation different from the Greco-Roman conceptualization and praxis of the process is that in all Pauline reconciliation discourse, God is the subject or the initiator of the act. Whereas in the Hellenistic culture, akin to the dominant contemporary practice of reconciliation process, the offender is the one expected to demonstrate guilt and seek forgiveness.

This is not the case in the Christian way, however, where God who is the offended takes the initiative to reconcile with us who are the offenders. As Christians we are then expected to behave likewise towards our brothers and sisters who have offended us, without any pre-condition of demanding or expecting the offender to issue a public apology, or show remorse and beg for forgiveness.

As victims in the Christian faith, we are the ones expected to initiate the process and forgive the perpetrator already. In short, reconciliation is not only the core of our faith, but also the primary mandate of the church.

Of course, reconciliation continues to be the domain of the secular political discourse. In the conflict resolution arena, reconciliation has gain acceptance as part and parcel of transitional justice practice or peace-building, more generally.

I will enumerate on this in some detail when we discuss the way forward and the peace-building model that best suits our reconciliation efforts in South Sudan, in order for the process to deliver the intended results of restoring harmony and healthy relationship in our broken society.

Until then, I encourage our brothers and sister, elders and mothers, political leaders, spiritual leaders, and traditional and tribal leaders to form a cohesive unit and rally behind the national reconciliation initiative.

Let us begin to think of strategic planning and design of the process that can better serve our aspiration of peace-building, nation-building, and state-building in South Sudan. END

Editorial Analysis MAY/12/2013, SSN;

Whilst the combined stature of Equatorias’ trio of Governors Bakasoro, Wani and Lobong can’t certainly match that of world-famous South African Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, these governors and their Equatoria SPLM members who recently held the Extraordinary Equatoria Conference in Juba should learn some lesson from the Nobel laureate. Tutu has unequivocally announced that he’d no longer cast his vote for the Mandela-founded ANC because of “corruption, violence and inequality.”

Archbishop Tutu further explained that “the ANC was good at leading us in the struggle to be free from oppression, but it doesn’t seem to me now that a freedom fighting unit can easily make a transition to becoming a political party or leading a nation.”

Just as equally relevant to our own predicament, Dr. Lual Deng, a man so close to late Dr. John Garang himself, in his newest book, “The Power of Creative Reasoning: the ideas and vision of John Garang,” explicitly wrote that, “Salva Kiir’s responsibility was to take the people to the promised land, but the development of the promised land is a different mission that requires a different leader, and we expect a divine intervention in this regard.”

Dr. Lual Deng blatantly concluded, “it’s therefore imperative for Joshua (Salva Kiir) to give way to a developmental leader of the promised land, that’s the Republic of South Sudan.”

Verily, the South Sudan, but particularly Equatoria, is at a critical juncture especially with the impending so-called leadership crisis now evolving among those SPLM top members who, if the truth be told, all of them don’t really deserve the top position they are keenly aspiring for, especially with their horrendous leadership over the past eight years.

Historically, since Equatoria Region back then in 1983 precipitated the Kokora (Redivision) of South Sudan that saw the expulsion of the Nilotic Dinka and Nuer and Shilluks to their particular ‘home states’ and the evolution of the SPLM/A war which Equatorians rightly construed as reaction to Kokora, there has never been any genuine trust or closeness between the Equatorians and the others.

Governor Clement Wani Konga of Central Equatoria steadfastly fought on the side of enemy Arabs, preventing the SPLA from ever capturing Juba till the end of the war when he along with other militia leaders like Paulino Matip finally reconciled with the SPLA in 2005.

On the other hand, Western Equatoria Governor Bakosoro was forcefully ejected from the SPLM party during the last gubernatorial election but was later pardoned and readmitted back in the SPLM, inarguably losing his so-called independent stature which had hitherto garnered him the massive popularity to win the governorship against the party-supported candidate.

First, judging from each of the governors speeches, one visibly discerns signs of fear among these governors as they all started their speeches by addressing the president (Kiir) whose ghost wasn’t even anywhere in the hall, as if their speeches were scripted for them to placate Kiir and the party, but more embarrassingly, their singular message was a strong warning to anyone trying to usurp the powers from President Kiir.

Secondly, the predicated contest expected between president Kiir, Machar and others, for the Chairmanship of the SPLM party and the eventuality of multiple candidates contesting in the national presidential election, is a democratic right of any member of the party and it shouldn’t be sanctioned by any body for that matter.

Lastly, Equatoria today is not a homogeneous society in spite of being at peace with itself, and moreover, each of its three states has its own particularity and parochial interest, especially their closeness to and acceptability by the ruling SPLM under President Kiir.

Significantly, these Equatoria governors and their SPLM ministers and officials are equally complicit in the systemic corruption, bad governance and insecurity so prevalent in each state which only amply mirrors and amplifies what is going on in the government of president Kiir itself.

Corruption in each of the Equatoria states obviously emanates from the top to the bottom, so, which governor really can boldly stand up and sincerely and publicly declare his financial assets or vow that he is absolutely clean? Which Equatoria state governor or official can publicly vow that he hasn’t abused his office for personal gain or that of his family members?

For instance, while Wani Konga publicly laments about land grabbing mostly of the Bari land around Juba, how clean and free is he and his family, or his local ministers and officials on this land grabbing? Just recently he publicly provided Vice president Machar a big chunk of Mundari land, ominously openly up inevitable a land grabbing appetite for more Mundari land.

Eastern Equatoria under governor Louis Lobong today is shamefully experiencing famine and government-sanctioned murder of its own citizens ostensibly condemned as cattle thieves. Where is the so-called smartness of these Equatorians if they thought they were homo sapiens one stage higher than the Dinka or the Nuer?

Practically, each one of the Equatoria governors worriedly expressed their apprehension on the impending war that would take place in Equatoria between the Dinka of Kiir and the Nuer of Machar and the impact of such eventuality would only definitely exacerbate the already fragile situation in the region.

How naive, hypocritical and irresponsible of these Equatoria SPLM leaders gathered in that cosy conference hall to needlessly worry about being the “grass that suffers when two elephants fight,” as if they are constrained by some invisible power not to avert or ameliorate the severity of their predicament?

Wake up, men and ladies of Equatoria, you’re now in dirty game of politics and politicking, and as they say, there is no permanent friend or enemy in politics, and the presumption of neutrality is not an option.

You are either with one or the other, especially since your collective decision has been already made easier — since ‘Greater’ Equatoria has shamefully capitulated and accepted to be hostages and second-class citizens — so, it’s either standing with Machar or Kiir, period.

Unsurprisingly, Governor Clement Wani Konga narrated multiple failures committed and commissioned obviously by the current Kiir misrule and failed government, which of course incriminates also Machar, so, like the humble Archbishop Tutu, who has supported the ANC all his life without ever betraying the cause of liberation waged by Mandela, Equatorians have the other alternative of not supporting either person.

If really those Equatorian SPLM supporters seated on those posh chairs are genuinely concerned about the future of South Sudan Nation and if they are collectively pained by the relentless suffering and depravity endured by the common people as a result of the immoral rule by Kiir-Machar, they, like Tutu again, should reject to vote for the same criminalized party, the SPLM.

Furthermore, to quote Dr. Lual Deng again, who has been a staunch SPLM/A adherent, “there is absence of a visionary leadership which has led to sclerotic management of the SPLM bureaucracy.”

Just within one year after independence, the country has been declared a failed state, the people of South Sudan, who should have been fortuitously blessed with abundance of natural resources, the situation has continuously deteriorated, thanks to the myopic and dysfunctional leadership of the SPLM under Kiir and Machar.

Indefensibly, the behaviour of the leadership these Equatorian leaders purportedly support has engendered international shame like the $4 billion dollar theft which has remained unresolvable because the third top SPLM person, the Equatorian Speaker, Wani Iga, conspired in disabling the national legislative assembly from doing anything.

It’s time these Equatorian leadership in the SPLM seriously acknowledged that there is palpable and irrefutable evidence that there is a leadership vacuum at the top level of the government and the party itself. Those close to Dr. John Garang might still recall his repeated quotation that ‘the fish rots from head down,’ a fact that the brave Professor Wako reiterated so adamantly to President Kiir recently.

Finally, if all Equatorians, together, are seriously concerned and perturbed by the unpredictable crisis looming ahead, they all either quit the SPLM and form their own party to contest in the leadership, or otherwise, the lesser evil would be to collectively align with the next alternative to Kiir and hopefully anticipate to reap some dividends for their support of the next leader of the country.

Better still, like Archbishop Tutu, they don’t vote for the SPLM again. Why not, you are free at last, you are no longer stooges, the choice is in your own hands. Why be the grass being trodden upon, why not be the hunter and shoot down both elephants…… politically speaking, that is…….

BY: J. Nguen, CANADA, MAY/9/2013, SSN;

“Truth alone will obtain a lasting victory”
–Antoine Nicolas.

Human’s perfectibility before the law and above all else is what defines truthfulness and moral absolute. Herein, I feel obliged to write to what I think prescribes to this humanistic perfectionism for awakening proposes to further a positive collective progress and allow informed participatory decision making process in South Sudan. Since independence, there have been heroic burst of energy from the youth who wanted to change the status quo with well-grounded intent of good governance in order for the new country to restart anew.

Despite these positive attempts, more than once, people of South Sudanese have been kept in the dark and denied access to information and participation in political discourses aimed to shape the future of the new country. Often, the intents for exclusion are for short ends but long term dictatorship and coercion government outlook in South Sudan and in the SPLM. Because of this, I purposefully decided to write, to share with my fellow South Sudanese issues of special interest that bond us together and which are solely confined to the SPLM party and its long awaited upcoming SPLM 3rd National Convention this month, May 2013.

To begin with, I must declare before my readers that I am a proud member of the SPLM party and I will always be, like I have been for the last 24 years, so long the principles and the values for which this party was founded upon remains standing, strictly kept and perfected to the highest regard by those whom the party entrusted to carries the baton. Based on these principles, this is where I sincerely believe SPLM party is too big to be a one man dynasty and a wrong platform to stage a brutal dictatorship leadership.

Therefore, the key aim of this commentary is to enlighten members of the SPLM party and the general public to ensure that no one is denied or deprived freedom to information and inputs about importance matters that are being discuss in the Political Bureau meetings, prior to the forthcoming SPLM 3rd National Convention.

Currently, there are four agenda items before the PB, which are as follow:

1. The SPLM constitution;
2. The SPLM manifesto:
3. The SPLM code of conduct;
4. The SPLM Basic rules and regulations;

In February and March 2013, the highest organ of the SPLM party, Political Bureau met and discussed most of the above mentioned agenda items. There were reports of unanimous consensus on major items but bitter disagreements on the constitution voting processes and internal democracy. Hence, this is where I would like to focus to ensure that public is aware and inputs of the SPLM party members are welcomed to help in the deliberations process.

In a nutshell, the disagreements arise because President Salva Kiir Mayardit proposed and demanded a show of hands voting method as oppose to the secret ballot in the SPLM 3rd National Convention elections. The president asserted that “the voting process in the SPLM 3rd National Convention shall be a show of hands, no more, no less.”

However, Mr. President’s position was bitterly opposed by many members in the Political Bureau in both meetings because the method is open to intimidation; bribery and it compromises voter’s security, but the president seemed not to get it. Therefore the issue remains unsettled because Mr. President has refused to consent despite the fact that his position is weak, unsustainable and only used in medieval times on temporary platforms, where there was only one nominee for the post.

Those who rejected President Kiir’s position argued that a secret ballot is an ideal method, because it “allows voters to make confidential choices and thus helps prevent intimidation and bribery” while the show of hands voting method is open to intimidation and bribery. Not only that the secret ballot is flawless method, it is use universally around the globe. For instance, the secret ballot voting method was passed to law in British in 1872, Canada in 1874, USA in 1892 and Australia in the 1850 and the list is almost endless. In these instances, the key reason was that “it is the only appropriate method that ensures voter’s security, sincere choice and forestalling attempts to influence the voter by intimidation or bribery” (1838).

With method as flawless as this, why is President Salva Kiir strenuously pushing for a “show of hands,” an outdated method subjected to flaws and abject bribery and deadliest intimidation? Of course, this is for anyone’s good guess. But the simple answer is that Mr. President admires coercive method and one man show governance. It has worked in the past perfectly in his favor and still being utilizes intensively in RSS. For example, this method of bribery and intimidation were used during 2010 elections and when the South Sudan Interim Constitution was being passed into the law of the land. Mr. President demanded unnecessary powers and got away with it.

Here, it will be unforgivable political blunder if President Kiir gets away with this ill informed motive in the SPLM 3rd National Convention because the demand is at best gravely contrary to the SPLM founding principles. Outrageous as it sounds, it adds to the fact that people South Sudan have had enough sell outs already from an inconsistency, indifference and unfocused war veteran and head of state. However, I am convinced that the SPLM aspirants and the PB will not and must not allow the president to triumph with such disastrous, illogical and irrational method of voting.

I am also sure that our people know better. They know the reasons why we took arms, because the reasons were clearly articulated in the SPLM’s founding document and well communicated to them. The truth is President Kiir should have known this better than anyone else, because he was in the heart of the movement, but it lately appeared the SPLM’s programmes are still too complicated and too overwhelming for a man who never had administrative experiences or a formal education to say the least. Without doubt, President Kiir is not the founding father of the nation but a step father who delivered the nation to its birth and he deserves minimal credits.

The other issue that generated major disagreement in the PB meetings is the internal democracy. President Kiir Mayardit demanded that “the SPLM Constitution shall only elect the Chairperson of the party and the National Liberation Council whereas the vice chairperson (s) of the party, the Political Bureau members and the Secretary General of the party shall be nominated by the chairperson of the party. Many think this is hypocritical and pathetic at best. Where in the world is this possible? Nowhere! Even in the “Animal Farm” where lion was named king of the jungle because his bravery and might, but the opposite is true for the poor president.

Another point made along the same argument was that all the above mentioned positions must be subjected to vigorous contest and each candidate must be democratically elected. In an essence, the canard rationale behind Mr. President’s position is to control the party as one man show as he falsely assumed that he will win the party’s chairmanship. The other poorly planned tactic was to bar young SPLM party’s aspirants from contesting for any position in the high organs of the party; and thus will keeps the party unsuccessful, underdeveloped, unreformed, not rejuvenated, not re-energized but instead remains under misguided old guards who ceased to think of anything positive.

Finally, President Kiir demanded to handpick 5% allocation of the SPLM’s 1,000 delegates (100 from each 10 states) to the national convention and be allocated to him. This position was bitterly opposed by majority in the Political Bureau meetings. Those who opposed see no justifiable reason why Mr. President should be given 5% percent allocation. Out of 1000 delegates that would attend the SPLM 3rd National Convention the president needed fifty people. This is not fair and logical to any SPLM member because it under-minds democratic ideals of the party. It also places the president at advantage above everyone else, in a party where everyone is considered equal.

To place this under honest scrutiny, President Kiir needs no special treatment in the party. However, if Mr. President refuses to relent as evident suggested in the PB meetings, it would be nothing short of miscarriage of justice and the move will certainly temper with proper SPLM party’s elections results in favor of the president. There is also a weak argument from the president that the mentioned 5% are for youth, women and disables. If this is true, the 5% is meant for youth, women and disable, then, this should be given to each state to bring their women, youth and disable and not by the president of the Republic. More so, the women, the youth and the disable must also democratically compete and should not be handpicked by the President.

In closing, it is true that confusion reigns under President Kiir’s leadership since independent or even before the South Sudan’s Interim Constitution became law of the land under one man’s dynasty. Lazy old guards and some uninformed general public are now taking notice of the fault made 20 months on since South Sudan independent on the 9th July 2011. Because the flaw in the institution distresses and continue to affects every thread of our society politically, economically and socially. Presently in replica, President Kiir is demanding for the repeat of the same unwelcomed grave mistake.

I believe SPLM members are not really that fool to make the same political blunder made during the passing of South Sudan Interim Constitution in 2011. But surprisingly if may, few in the political Bureau remained silent when Mr. President strenuously demanded for unnecessary powers and unlawful voting processes in the SPLM Constitution, thus, I cannot escape the question why few reasonable beings in the PB do behaved so unreasonably?

For this commentary, the facts now are before the public for public scrutiny and inputs in order to propel matters that are of national interest and beyond our ethnic lines. It is undeniable that South Sudanese in general have been unlawfully denied participatory rights and their inputs have not been considered by the system and the same government they previously blindly trust. So, the question is how long can we be victims of a system of exploitations before saying enough is enough?

“The people cannot be fooled for long into accepting … those they judge to be self- aggrandizing and seeking to enrich or benefit themselves at their expense” Robert Mugabe

True in our case! Around the world, people of South Sudan have lost confident on the SPLM party led government under Kiir and this is no secret. Our people have no hopes and aspirations anymore simple because President Kiir’s government is too corrupt, too tribalized, too irrational, too misguided, too inconsistent, too confused and too lazy to deliver big programmes and vision and mission of the SPLM party. In addition, the government is also too big for the president himself to “handle,” as previously alluded to by Deng Alor Kuol, the current Minister of cabinets Affairs in RSS.

In South Sudan for example, people are being killed in thousands daily and President Kiir does not care to even address a nation and mourn with South Sudanese who lost their loved ones. Strangely, President Kiir instead condemned the deceased. Good example of this occurred in Western Bar El Ghazal State when Mr. President condemned the deceased killed by RSS’ police force. Similarly, President Kiir never visited SPLA troops in borders, Fangak Nuer, Murle people, Dinka Bor and Lou Nuer in their villages who are losing their loved ones daily due to Mr. President’s miscalculated moves. What a President! In other nations, especially in the west, if one person is killed the President will address his or her nation to calm the people down, mourn with them and assure them that justice will be done.

The evidences mentioned are unquestionable an abject failures, but Mr. President is weirdly in a gruesome denial. He instead resorted to higher end immorality of blame game tactics, tribalized politic, rampant corruption, arbitrary arrest and killing of innocence South Sudanese who seems to questions how he misguidedly and blindly runs the government. He is in a hopeless pursues of cover up and masking up his inability to lead and deliver services effectively.

Mr. President need to be corrected that South Sudan is not being runs like other nations. There is no nation in this planet where the head of the sate can sack or remove elected government officials and governors without any due process. There is no nation in this planet where sensitive organs of the government institutions are assigned to and runs one tribe men/women and by extension one clan for that matter.

There is no nation in this planet where $ 4 billions US dollars was stolen by 75 government officials and no one has been persecuted and held accountable. There is nowhere in this planet where $ 6 millions dollars/pounds were kept in the President’s office in cash and at the end got stolen. With these disappointing facts, President Kiir was mistaken by stating that “we are a new country. This is why the whole world has turned to us and [is] watching closely to see what we are doing. It is not because what is happening in this country is not happening in other countries.”

Beside, President Kiir is currently in a dangerous pursues of reminiscing Uganda President’s dictatorship style, but the truth is, SPLM as a party is a wrong platform to stage such brutal tyranny ideals. Similarly, the South Sudanese people are not Ugandans to be dictated.

Above features are what defines the current government in South Sudan, and therefore I wonder, should the SPLM party members just standby and allow an inconsistent leader with distorted conscience to turn people’s SPLM into one man dynasty with irrational ideals and batters us with outdated voting processes while we watch? I don’t think so. SPLM party is too big, too strong and it has high moral principles and values which are unfit for one man dynasty.

J. Nguen is a concerned South Sudanese citizen living in Canada. He can be reached at nyolgaar@yahoo.com

President Salva Kiir Mayardit’
Republic of South Sudan

Cc: Lou Nuer elders and Politicians.

Subject: PRESS RELEASE: Lou Nuer Community Rejected some elders and politicians’ six (6) points Letter to the President as Betrayal and Shameful Act

APR/30/2013, SSN;

The Lou Nuer Community (LNC) worldwide is shocked and appalled by the divisive and unproductive move made by some of our elders and politicians, hence, the intention of this Press Release is to condemn them in the strongest terms possible. These elders and politicians are puppets and stooges of Gabriel Yoal Dok, Dr. Barnaba Marial Bejamin, and John Luk Joak, who have taken them to the President on Thursday, 25 April 2013, where they handed over the 14 April 2013 six (6) points letter which says “the Lou Nuer Community is hereby reaffirming that we are fully behind you and will stand firm with you in the 2015 General Election.”

The Lou Nuer Youth in general and Lou Nuer women and the Lou Nuer in Diaspora are outraged and disgusted by this betrayal of the Community by these elders and politicians who have chosen food above the LNC. We denounce it and we reject it completely. Calling for youth in general and women and LNC members in Diaspora to distance themselves from this political wrangling between the President and his Vice does not make sense since they have taken sides with the President, even though the Community has not taken sides yet; therefore, any advices from these elders and politicians is no longer worthy.

Before addressing whether this is the position of the LNC or not, it is worth mentioning that this meeting between the President and the individual elders and politicians comes as a result of the meeting which was held earlier on Sunday, 14 April 2013 in John’s house. In that meeting all MPs of the Greater Akobo were invited and the agenda was about theirs position regarding the current situation between the President and the Vice. At the end of the deliberation, all the MPs agreed to take no position until the General Election period in 2015.

Unfortunately, now we have learned that some of these elders and politicians have gone to the President where they made a declaration without shame and in disgrace that the LNC is fully behind him in 2015 General Election contrary to what was agreed in the meeting where they were all present.

These individuals’ elders and politicians were declaring this position without consulting with the members of the community in Greater Akobo Counties, Juba, or in Diaspora. How did they come up with this then? This is what we are going to address in the next paragraphs in details.

First of all, we would like to make it crystal clear that LNC is not a Political Party which can go simply the way these elders and politicians would want it to be as it is clear in their six (6) points letter. We are one Community and we are always united when there are things that threaten our existence as a people here in the Republic of South Sudan. We are united in saying no to this position.

We are also aware that we do not belong to one political party where we can go according to what the elders and politicians said. We do respect each other’s views when it comes to politics, and no one can make a choice for another in our community so what these elders and politicians are trying to do is for the first time since Mr. Peter Gatkuoth Gual and Mr. Chiech Lam were in politics.

Due to these reasons, we would like to make it abundantly clear that we did not hold a meeting as Community where we deliberated about 2015 General Election and agreed all to support President Salva Kiir. We feel that it would be premature to speculate on position since we have a long way to go. Why should we speculate on positions while we still have two more years to go?

The 14th April 2013 six (6) Points letter submitted to the President is only representing the position of those individual elders and politicians who wrote it and does not represent the whole community. Anyone who claims that it is for the whole Community should now know it is not. As a Community we will have a position when the time is right but not now.

The message to the President is that these three (3) guys will fail you if you will depend on them. You will fail the 2015 General Election; if you rely on them for everything, because they will never tell you what the Lou Nuer Community really want so that they can vote for you.

1. These elders and politicians are out of touch with the reality.
2. They are out of touch with the ordinary members of the Lou Nuer Community.
3. And they are out of touch with the mainstream of the Lou Nuer Community.

Let’s brief you a little bit about them so that you can know you will fail the 2015 General election, if these are your massengers to the Greater Akobo Counties in 2015.

This is an old guard – an outdated politician still alive today in the Lou Nuer community. This old man is out of touch with most members of the Lou Nuer Community. In the last Election he cannot even convince his own area to vote for him, can he convince the entire Lou Nuer Community to vote for Salvakiir?

This is a stomach politician and lonely eater, stingy and selfish. This guy has no value in LNC and does not know how to speak, even in the Church, let alone Parliament or Political rally, so how can he get the Lou Nuer members to vote for Kiir?

We are not interested to take sides at the moment but we would like to dispute some of the points made by John Luk in the 14th April 2013 Six (6) points Letter to the President, especially when it comes to the democratic system in the SPLM.

Cde. John,
What democratic system is there in the SPLM when at the moment in the process of the approval of the basic documents you are setting up a dictatorship system?
1. For instance, if we have democratic system and should be maintained in our Party, why are you allowing the proposed 18 members of the Political Bureau (PB) to be appointed all by the Chairman of the Party after the 3rd National Convention?
2. Why should the Secretary General (SG), the Chief Administrative Officer of the Party be subjected to the selection by the PB and not the National Convention (NC) as usual?
3. And why did the suggestion for the term limit (for how many times) the Chairman of the Party can run for the Presidency of the Republic of the South Sudan was dropped in the process of the approval of the basic documents by the PB which you are part of —just to mention a few…..

By the way you have nullified and dissolved the National Liberation Council (NLC) and the NC by approving the proposed SPLM Constitution which has placed all powers only in the hands of the Chairman.

Another interesting point from John’s Six (6) points Letter to the President is, where he had made it clear that the Lou Nuer area is the worst affected and neglected which has been torn apart by insecurity and all kinds of problems, including lack of development in the RSS, yet, he and some elders and politicians from LNC are approving the work of the President and promising him another vote of LNC in 2015 General Election.

What a contradictory statement? What a world we live in, and what a Community led by fools?

From this statement is where you begin to know clearly how these elders and politicians of the LNC think when we are at a crossroad or a critical future. These elders and politicians of ours always put theirs interest first above the community and a good example of that is this six 6 points letter of John to the President of the RSS.

When it comes to the point that one should not campaign tribal in the letter of John, because SPLM has a system and political structures of solving these things is where also you begin to realize what John is doing here.

On the point of tribalism here, John is pleasing his master, the President and accusing the Vice President of being tribal only to secure his position in the upcoming Cabinet reshuffle.

However, the good things for the accused is that gone are the days when one can lie much about you and people will believe it. These days one cannot lie anymore because nowadays the majority of the South Sudanese people are reading internet, newspapers, watch SSTV, and share what is happening on daily basis.

Having said that, none of the four candidates who have declared their bid for Presidency of the RSS are free from organizing people tribally. So, John should cease pleasing his Master by accusing people for the same thing which his master is performing.

In terms of the ones who are vying for Chairmanship of the SPLM and the President of the Country, we see it as their right as citizens of this Country and members of the SPLM contrary to the way John had alluded to in his appeasing Letter to the President.

Absolutely there are processes and steps to be followed in the SPLM in order to prevent division and split within the Party, but also it requires lobbying, mobilization, and campaign on the side of those who are vying for positions, unlike the way John would want us to believe.

In addition, these structures and Policy organs of the Party are not free from tribalism and dictatorship, instead they are turned into fields of domination by some over others because they’ve been rigged and not working according to the interest of all the members of the Party.

So why would John want us to believe in rigged organs and structures and not allow individuals to come up with their own ideas and say I wanted to be a Chairman or President as it is happening now?

Our message to these elders and politicians is to play a united role between the President and the Vice President by reconciling them, because taking sides will not solve anything but instead it will widen the differences between the two leaders. We need the two leaders to be working together for the development of the Country and for the success of the SPLM 3rd National Convention, as well as the General Election in 2015.

To the President:
Our Community has been torn apart by war and many things which some of them are caused by your government and you failed to provide solutions for it. Our community is lacking the following:
1. No roads from Bor to Greater Akobo Counties
2. No schools and health facilities in the Lou Nuer area which have been established.
3. Our community has been disarmed more than 4 times where we have been left unprotected and insecure.
4. We are the single largest Community in Jonglei, but up to now we have never been considered for Governorship Position.

We feel that we have two more years to go and we see this as a big opportunity for you to address some of these challenges before the Election, because our votes in 2015 General Election will not be influenced by number of ministers, Chairpersons, or Deputy Chairpersons you had given us or you will be giving us in the future, and also it will not be influenced by the 4 mentioned elders and politicians, but by the four mentioned points regarding development in the Lou Nuer areas, as well as the following four points below which we want you to make improvement on when it comes to South Sudan-wide.

Those points are here as follow:
1. Insecurity
2. Corruption
3. Tribalism in Ministries
4. And employment issue

There is a saying in America that when, “Ohio goes, so goes the presidency..” When we and our neighbors of Dinka Bor, Greater Fangak, Anuak, Kacippo and Murle decide in 2015 then it will be known that Jonglei State has decided and when Jonglei goes, so Goes the Presidency!

Singned: By Lou Nuer members worldwide.

1. Peter DakNhial– Chairman- Jonglei State; 2. Simon PurThok- Jonglei State; 3. BilGatluakChuol; 4. William BiliewJal; 5. Paul RuotGatluak; 6. Paul KuolGatluak; 7. James Pal Chuol; 8. GatdetReat Tut; 9. Simon BuomGatkuoth – U.S.A; 10. Tut GatluakChuol; 11. Tut ChuolGatluak; 12. Sarah NyachewChuol; 13. Mary Nyadow Tut; 14. CholGatluak Char; 15. Jima GatkuothDak; 16. Tut ReathDak; 17. John GatluakBidit; 18. Daniel Kun Chuol – Canada; 19. NhialKoangYiel; 20. WiyualChuol Tot – Australia; 21. Lam Deng Tut; 22. Peter NhialChuol; 23. NhialGatluakKoang.

BY: Kabarika Loliha Lokang, Dallas, TEXAS, USA, APR/27/2013, SSN;

The Election of Lobong to the Governorship of Eastern Equatoria State a few years ago was viewed with a lot of skepticism given his attitude toward other neighboring tribes. Though he had never expressed his ill-motives against the long-time foes of his Toposa tribe such as the Didinga, Buya and other tribes surrounding the greater Kapoeta area, there was no doubt in many people’s minds that time will come when Lobong will reveal his hidden agenda to enact punishment on our people, especially the Didinga.

Lobong’s hatred toward the Didinga people is well documented and everybody around those great hills and Mountains of Budiland knows it. The Budi people at large have suffered in the hands of Louis Lobong either directly or indirectly. Sending of the National army (SPLA) with an order to capture, kill, loot or terrorize is something beyond the governorship’s power, because the Army were used just as messengers to carry an order.

Lobong must be held accountable for the loss of innocent lives of children, aged and civil servants who were killed in cold blood by the SPLA Juntas.

The army is to protect civilians against foreign invasion while the police are there to deal with domestic crimes. But Lobong and his gangsters view it differently.

According to the Presidential decree that recently relieved the few governors including Louis Lobong from Military ranks and active duties, I wonder what power did Lobong use in order to command 1300 active SPLA soldiers to raid the villages of Lorema and Kikilai?

Didn’t the presidential decree prohibit relieved governors from commanding army for any given reason without first consulting with the President should the situation gets beyond state police reach?

Obviously Lobong used the post he has at the moment to suppress and intimidate his opponents. Sending in heavily loaded military personnel to scotch the population of Lorema and Kikilai people was a crime against Humanity.

This incident didn’t just happen by itself, it’s my understanding that it was systematically planned long time. However, because there was no excuse to conduct the operation earlier, the raid of Bira Community by few non-law abiding of Budi provided the opportunity that led to this indiscriminate firing squad of the Lorema and Kikilai peace loving civilians.

Innocent people lost lives and their precious properties and belongings through this in-discriminatory act by the SPLA forces. What was the real connection between the School that was burned to ashes and the raiding of the Bira community property?

What connection was there between the Killing of innocent Children and the Health professional personnel with the cattle raid in the Neighboring community?

These people in the lowland part of Didinga land are the very innocent community that the Lobong puppets should have visited the least. The cattle rustlers don’t live in the health clinic or dispensaries, they don’t live or stay in the school either. The real criminals that caused atrocity with our neighboring community of Bira might be hiding up in the Mountains.

Because Governor Lobong and his goons could not have the guts to put the law in good practice by pursuing those responsible in killing of Bira community people. The act by those few Didinga youth is condemned by everybody. It’s inhuman, it’s criminal to continue doing this act of raiding peoples’ property and belonging, whether the perpetrators are the Buyas, the Didingas, the Langos or Toposas, anyone found red-handed should be subjected to the highest law available in the country.

It’s very clear that the governor’s intention was to use the opportunity created by few bad elements in Budi county to bring down the people of Budi to their knees. This isn’t his first time to order the massacre of innocent People of Budi.

The massacre of 54 innocent children, young and old people in Lauro few years ago has all the fingers pointing to Mr Lobong. Unless the law possibly consider Lobong as a person of interest in orchestration of tribal conflict around the greater Kapoeta, no one may live peacefully there.

Lobong is a lowly criminal governor. His hatred toward the people of Budi is undeniable. If using SPLA soldiers to bring havoc to Budi people is not subjected to the thorough investigation, a lot of the same tactics will again catch others by surprise sooner or later.

This the same Lobong who in the past allegedly used his tribal militia of “Namorunyang” to cause a lot of havoc to the people of Tala, Ngauro/Lauro, and Lotukei. Now, after his advancement in power did he use the National military to suppress his opponents.

The case of Lorema and Kikilai was never about the raiding of Bira and Lotome communities, it’s a well rooted grudge that he, Lobong, has been holding toward the people of Budi. It was only a matter of time before Lobong showed his true colors. What a pathetic shame!

Knowing what he was up to, Lobong has never conceded and accepted the mistake he legally ordered to be executed. Lobong has never bowed down to the criticism he received from many local leaders and the Media at large. Only to say that it was his bodyguards ordered to retrieve back the stolen cattle was merely his typical nature of perpetual denial.

Having said that, the governor and those connected with this high level barbaric crime have forgotten what the law is supposed to do. Instead of implementing the Law to capture the culprits, they instead reversed the true meaning of the law by putting the law into their own hands.

They judged from the very spot the order was given to do as they wish upon arriving in the targeted areas of Lorema and Kikilai. The governor and his like should have known better. When the blood of innocent children and Health professionals spilled without a clear reason, those responsible for these atrocities must be held accountable for their dirty actions.

As far as cattle rustling is concerned, the Didinga are not the only ruthless tribe that conducted this illegal operation. The entire region surrounding the greater Kapoeta is full of Cattle rustlers. Because Lobong’s government doesn’t play a major role in tackling these issues beginning from his court-yard, the rest of the tribes are allowed to do as they wish.

I don’t condone this sinful act of illegally stealing somebody’s property for your personal gains. Be it the Didinga, the Buya, Toposa or any tribes, the act of raiding and stealing cattle from other tribes is a great crime that should be punished by any law present in the Country.

The government should lead by a good example but not sowing the seeds of hatred as Lobong’s administration has just revealed. If the government cannot differentiate between law abiding citizens and the wrongdoers, the the whole of South Sudan is in dire need of awaking up.

None of us perceives this evil act of stealing cattle as a legitimate profession, but a cheap and cowardly means of robbing people their hard-earned property. I don’t care whether the person stealing is from Didinga, Buya, Lango or Toposa, those caught red-handed must be punished by the ultimate law of the land that’s available.

By learning from our mistakes, we should chose to do what is right in our community. Our warring tribes need peace-building seminars to teach them the importance of the laws and the great advantages of interdependence, but not the ugliness and mightiness of the law that suppresses the lives of our people. Laws available have to be put into action to curb down this ill motive of cattle rustling. END

“We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.” quoted from Aesop

BY: J. Nguen Nyol, CANADA, APR/24/2013, SSN;

This is what ought to happen in South Sudan but it is unlikely because we are too immature, too tribalized and too irrational to the core. If I may, rationality is being truthful and driven by honest conviction to act and die for what is highly moral as “law is the objectivity” of good instinct. True, but I resent that good never seems to triumph for long before some evil interrupts. Sadly, this is the case in the Republic South Sudan considering the recent suspension of nationwide national reconciliation rescheduled for June 2013.

President Kiir suspended that landmark event despite its overwhelming support from South Sudanese and friends across diversity and various geographical locations around the globe. Inability to think, tribalism and political jealousy to earn credits for what one did not sow, matters in South Sudan so long one is in position of power. This is where things don’t get done in that country because free thinkers are not allowed to thinks freely to enhance innovative ideas.

Everyone is expected to play dumb to resemble the big man at the top. Such trends are the political reality where I was born and where the national reconciliation was suspended on baseless grounds.

After the fact, I felt saddened and disgusted simply because I am aware of the implications on people who needed to heal in order to repair their shattered lives and redevelop a damaged nation were one’s held hostage without national reconciliation in the country. By all accounts, it was a desperate and blinded move ever to say the least.

This is equally painful to many who wanted to heal and desperately disappointing to learn that President Kiir was indeed an obstacle to peace process.

It is one of the gross mistakes ever committed by a sitting president. It is a political blunder, deplorable and unforgivable injustice done by President Kiir to his own people. Above all, it is undoubtedly an endorsement and affirmation of hatred and simmering sentiments among South Sudan’s sixty three odd tribes.

This brings me to the reason why I decided to write this commentary. My aim is to help readers understand that President Kiir was duped into such deplorable eventuality. Also to point out that lack of political shrewdness has complicated the matters and in many respects led to the unsolicited political decision which was poorly presented just like the previous insidious political verdict before it.

In a nutshell, since the untimely death of late Dr. John Garang in 2005, South Sudan has politically been downgraded at a disappointingly rapid pace and more so toward a rogue state.

To start with, it is true that President Kiir was part of the movement who fought on the basis to overhaul the deformed Khartoum regime and then build on common values guided by clear conscience goals to ensure peace and freedom. However, after he (president) ascended to power in 2005, such liberation ideals, values and principles were thrown overboard and became things of the past.

Hoodwinked or not, Mr. President has placed South Sudan and its people before the custodianship of misguided, ill-informed and opportunists cliques. At will, Kiir placed his cronies in sensitive positions in the Republic of South Sudan (RSS) which include the banking and financial systems, judiciary, foreign missions, military and security apparatus.

After ensuring control over these institutions, the president and his clan-mate cliques set out on the next phase of embezzling public funds in billions of dollars in the cover of darkness or in broad daylight.

Four shocking examples of this scheme that caught international headlines were:

1. The $ 3.millions dollars (allegedly) caught red-handed from Mr. Stephen Madut Baak at the Heathrow International Airport in London in 2008, where Mr. Baak was unhesitant to mention that he was working for president as an adviser;
2. The $ 4 billion reported missing by none other than President Kiir himself in 2012 and the $ 600 millions reported allegedly stolen by the former RSS minister of finance, Arthur Akuien Chol in 2008;
3. The $ 20 million stolen (allegedly) by Stephen Baak Wuol and $ 293 millions reported by Aaron Young stolen (allegedly) by none other than Elijah Salva Mathok Gengdit, the current deputy minister of interior in RSS;
4. And the $ 6 million dollars and South Sudan pounds reported stolen from the president’s office 2013;

These are not mere allegations but proven facts simply because the RSS as a nation started this journey with the wrong foot. For example, the former Governor of South Sudan bank, Mr. Elijah Malok Aleng, was not hesitant to assert this that “we already know of people who have millions in their accounts, whether in Ivory or Buffalo Banks. Where did you get the money from, it is simply because you got it wrongly.”

That said the suspension of national reconciliation by the president is just another insidious political blunder in human context. With the latest, South Sudan is once again placed at the crossroads, between good and evil. Weirdly, the evils in their distorted terms are appreciative of the direction in which the nation is heading while the good masses are indifferent and confused.

People are numbed to the core and ceased to think. Few who asked honest questions were threatened, kidnapped, killed and accused of wanting to overthrow the broken government. What a shame!

No one can justify beyond reasonable doubt that the suspended national reconciliation was a political enterprise or has been used as one by anyone. The fear is based on political insecurity and lack of political shrewdness from the top spoiled brat.

Another disappointing fact was that President Kiir allowed himself to be driven, misled and grossly manipulated at his disadvantage by well stationed crooks whose aims are to set him up for failure and expose his weaknesses as a head of state. The April 15 presidential decree read on South Sudan Television (SSTV) was one of them and meant to trash the president’s records.

The decree read dissolved national reconciliation committee and suspended national reconciliation process based on misconstrued political insecurity and erroneous speculations to say the least.

However, this was not the first time President Kiir made such erroneous and regrettable decisions based on ill-informed advice which exploited Mr. President’s weak self-confidence, self-esteem and the absence of political shrewdness.

In 2011, President Kiir demanded more powers to avoid unfounded insecurity and was bestowed unnecessary absolute powers in the South Sudan Interim Constitution. The clause granted the president power to remove elected officials including the governors. Four months ago, Kiir acted on this misplaced clause and removed Lakes state elected Governor, Mr. Chol Tong. Mr. Chol’s replacement was a military man.

Subsequently, Kiir emotionally led South Sudan to war with Khartoum regime which in eventuality led to Panthou crisis and the bombing of civilian targets by the Khartoum’s rogue regime. In that incident, more than 1000 SPLA soldiers died and to this day no one in South Sudan talked about this humiliating adventure.

After the fact, President Kiir made an uncivilized political remark toward Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary General. Kiir told South Sudan parliament on the televised broadcast that “I told Ban Ki-moon that I am not your commander and not answerable to your directive.”

The most disappointing part in that fiasco was that Kiir caved in and withdrew South Sudan troops from Helige in a cowardly disorganized fashion which resulted into the reportedly thousand death toll. Another poignant event emerged out of the Panthou Crisis was salaries of the deceased SPLA’s soldiers were cut in half in the same month they perished by the same government who sent them into harm’s way.

Out of emotive, Kiir frantically ordered the closure of South Sudan oil production without back up plan. For the last 20 months South Sudan’s civil servants barely got paid due to the fact there was no money in South Sudan reserve opposite to what president Kiir claimed.

Early this year, President Kiir relieved 153 senior army officers at once and replaced most of them with new close associates and tribal men. The move was nothing short of consolidating power and for South Sudan to become a rogue state. The move was seen by many analysts as a dangerous and irrelevant since it sets the new country into the wrong path of dictatorship.

Before President Kiir retired the 153 senior army officers, however, he also personally signed off big chunks of South Sudan’s land to Arabs in the name of the questionable demilitarized zone between two countries. The signed off places have never been in the historical part of the northern Sudan but Kiir signed them off to appease Arab Northern (Sudan) for South Sudan’s oil to flow north.

The sell out did not stop there. The president pledged to compensate North Sudan with $ 3 billion US dollars simply because South Sudan separated from Sudan. If President Kiir was politically smart and thought independently as an able politician, Sudan would have compensated South Sudan for the atrocities and human sufferings the north inflicted on South Sudan and not otherwise.

Rumor had it that President Kiir suspended the national reconciliation because of an internal strife in the SPLM between him and his VP, Riek Machar. Mading Ngor wrote, “the Vice President Riek appears to overplay his hands at times and some of his moves border on insubordination, expressed consciously or not.”

In this quote, Mading failed on specifying which area the VP may have overplayed his powers over his boss, which in my view amounts to mere speculation of a thought and insignificantly factual. If President Kiir has based his decision in suspending the national reconciliation citing above mentioned point as a reference, therefore, it’s fair to conclude that lack of confidence and political shrewdness are the driving factors.

As I was about to publish this commentary, I realized that President Kiir has on Monday appointed Archbishop of Episcopal Church of Sudan, Daniel Deng Bul Yak, to chair the national reconciliation and Archbishop of Catholic Church, Paride Taban as his deputy. This is indeed a good gesture as far as peace process is concerned in South Sudan, considering the fact those appointed are clergies of the House of God.

Who is Archbishop Daniel Deng Bul Yak?
Who is Archbishop Daniel Deng Bul Yak? Is he the right clergyman to lead this so much politicized national reconciliation?

Archbishop Daniel Deng Bul was born in 1950 in Twic East County, Jonglei State, South Sudan. Archbishop Bul has studied theology in Sudan and United State of American. His work with church since 1970s undoubtedly suggested a good clergy man but his work with people traumatized by war suggested otherwise.

Archbishop Bul spent most of his clergy work in the northern Sudan during the Sudan civil war, particularly in Port Sudan and Renk. Archbishop Bul did not live through the horrors during war time. During Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) it seemed, Archbishop Bul moved to Juba where he became the archbishop of the Episcopal Church of South Sudan.

After Sudan elections in 2010, Archbishop Bul was appointed to lead a peace delegation to make peace between rebels led by George Athor and the Republic of South Sudan. That peace initiative failed because Archbishop Bul was accused of conspiring with the RSS to capture George Athor instead.

During the Jonglei crisis, Archbishop Bul was also appointed to head the reconciliation process between the warring tribes in the Jonglei. In the process Archbishop Bul “was {also} accused by the Murle community of allegedly siding with the Dinka Bor, his tribe, prompting the Murle to withdraw from the reconciliation process and demanding for appointment of a neutral person to chair it.”

Given what we know, Archbishop Bul appeared problematic and might not be the right person to chair national reconciliation in South Sudan for the following reasons:

1. Archbishop Bul has never been in the bush and never experienced bush life and therefore he has no personal experience to relate to during the process of healing.
2. Archbishop Bul is already accused twice: one for siding with his native tribe during Jonglei peace process and for conspiring with RSS to capture George Athor. Therefore, his neutrality is in serious question;
3. Archbishop Bul’s appointment will be viewed as politically motivated and considered as the Dinka led political hegemony in the country;
4. Because the national reconciliation is already politicized on tribal basis and that President Kiir has intentionally avoided Archbishop Paride Taban to chair the process is another serious phenomenon and hurdle;
5. The two tribes that need serious focus in South Sudan in the course of this national reconciliation are the Dinka and The Nuer. They (Dinka & Nuer) must be led through this peaceful healing process by a neutral personality like Archbishop Paride Taban to avoid tribal siding.

Though I personally applauded and supported the formation of the new national reconciliation committee by the president, I honestly feel that President Kiir has again made another political blunder by not appointing Archbishop Paride Taban to lead the process. Archbishop Taban will be a right choice and considered neutral by all parties involved in the healing process. Because this issue was grossly ignored, there is no doubt that neutrality and fairness is in serious question.

J. Nguen Nyol is a concerned South Sudan citizen living in Canada. He can be reached at nyolgaar@yahoo.com