Category: More Views

UN Proposal to send 4000 troops to S.S. without consent is violation of sovereignty & aggression international law

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, Kampala, Uganda, AUG/23/2016, SSN;

The relationship between states or nations is founded on respect of national sovereignty. Sovereignty according to the Black’s Law Dictionary is the supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which independent state is governed.

In sovereign state, there is supreme political authority like parliament. In that respect, sovereignty is represented by paramount control through the Constitution and frame of government and its administration.

In addition, in sovereign State, there is the sufficient source of political power, from which all specific powers are derived. In this regard, sovereignty is the core of the international law on the independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating it internal affairs without foreign dictation.

In the case of South Sudan, when it became independent on 9th July, 2011, it immediately acquired the status of effective sovereignty that enabled it to enjoy all the immunities other countries, whether big or small or whether strong or weak enjoy.

I have mentioned the words “effective sovereignty” above to show that South Sudan was recognized by all Members of the United Nations without any exception, and therefore, as a matter of international law, it must enjoy equal rights with other nations including the USA.

Thus, the USA does not have more rights over South Sudan to treat it like one of its State. Instead, the USA must deal with South Sudan in accordance with international law, which sanctions the sovereignty of every nation in the world.

In sovereign nation, there is a political sovereignty, or State, which is sovereign and independent. The recognition of a state by other States to have political sovereignty is a matter of comity.

The Federal Supreme Court of the United States of America defined comity in Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113, 163-64 (1895), as follows: “Comity,” in the legal sense, is neither a matter of absolute obligation, on the one hand, nor of mere courtesy and good will, upon the other.

But it is the recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the legislative, executive or judicial acts of another nation, having due regard both to international duty and convenience, and to the rights of its own citizens, or of other persons who are under the protection of its laws.

In other words as explained in Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 482 U.S. 522, 544 n.27 (1987), comity refers to the spirit of cooperation in which a domestic tribunal approaches the resolution of cases touching the laws and interests of other sovereign states.

In this regard as provided under the public international law, sovereignty gives the country, its government and people the power to do everything within the country without accountability to external powers.

For instance, the state or her government makes laws, executes and applies them; imposes and collects taxes and levies contributions, makes war or peace, enters into treaties and forms alliances with or of commerce with foreign nations without being forced to do so.

Hence, sovereignty is the supreme power by which citizens are governed through their will as represented by persons or body of persons in the state who are politically empowered though not superior to the citizens.

Under the international law, sovereignty is a heart or core of the existence of all the states, their rights and powers that they enjoy.

The Constitution of the United Nations Organization (the UN Charter, 1945) zealously protects national sovereignty. This is because adulterating the concept of national sovereignty may seriously affect the international peace and relations among the nations.

Hence, the strong protection the concept of sovereignty enjoys under the UN Charter of 1945 is something that cannot be done away with stroke of a pen by one nation unless agreed by all nations and done in transparent manner.
Therefore, Article 2 (1) of the United Nations Organization Charter of 1945 provides that the United Nations Organization and its Members must be governed by the principle of the sovereign equality.

It should be observed that the United Nations Organization has 193 member countries with South Sudan as the newest nation which got her independence in 2011.

Under the UN Charter of 1945, all countries including the strongest countries like the USA and Russia and the newest and weakest country like South Sudan are equal and must be accorded the same treatment.

The above statement is supported by Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter of 1945, which is the basis of the international law governing sovereignty and equality of all the States. Article 2 (4) prohibits all states from using threat or military force against a sister state or any other measures that are inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

The purposes of the United Nations Organization (UNO) are provided under Article 1 of the United Nations Charter, which provides that the purposes of the UNO are:

–firstly, to maintain international peace and security; to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

–Secondly, to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

–Thirdly, to achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion and

–Finally, to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of the common ends as stated above.

In implementing the above purposes of the United Nations, the UN is enjoined to have regards to Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter which, refrain all the States from using force or threat of force against the State or use any other measures which are contrary to the international law.

The prohibition of the use or threat of force against State above under article 2(4) includes prohibition against interference with the State internal affairs by other states or invasion or sending external force without the consent of the State in question.

In reference to South Sudan, in which some members of the UN led by the USA have passed a resolution to send 4000 troops without the consent of South Sudan, such a move is contrary to the international law on the use of force as stated above unless justified under article 39 of the UN Charter of 1945.

Article 39 referred to above provides that the Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures to be taken to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Reading Article 39 above with article 2 (4) as already explained above, it implies that before the UN takes the course of military action or resort to military means, the Security Council must try all alternatives to restore peace before resorting to the use of force.

In fact, the use of force under the international law is the last method applied in the rarest cases. As a general rule, the UN in settling dispute must apply pacific (or peaceful) settlement of disputes as provided under article 33 of the UN Charter.

Article 33 (1) of the Charter provides that where there is the continuance of any dispute, which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, the parties to that dispute shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

The problem with the UN, the USA and the African Union in the case of South Sudan is that there are a lot of conflicting interests in bringing peace in South Sudan. These bodies are interested in showing that there is a peace in South Sudan than South Sudanese themselves believe it to be.

They have not paid attention to the saying that the absence of war does not necessary mean the presence of peace. In order to bring permanent peace, reconciliation and justice in South Sudan, South Sudanese should be given greater freedom under the supervision of the UN and African Union to negotiate their own means of bringing peace as provided under Article 33 of the UN Charter as already referred to above.

It is only when the Country fails to follow the above means of settle of dispute that is when the other methods as provided under articles 41 and 42 of the Charter may be invoked by the regional body like the African Union and the UN Security Council.

For proper understand, Article 41 of the Charter provides that the Security Council may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply measures, which include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations. This Article is the basis of economic sanction.

In addition, Article 42 of the Charter provides that should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security.

The actions may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nation. Hence, Article 42 as referred to above is the basis of economic and arms embargo not the basis of external intervention.

The reading of the articles 2 (4), 33, 39, 41 and 42 as already discussed above shows that it is not in the best interest of the UN to invade the country, or South Sudan in this case unless there are serious compelling reasons that justify such invasion.

The argument above is based on a simple logic that all options to bring peaceful dispute of the conflict must first be exhausted.

However in the case of South Sudan, the government and rebels have never been opportunities to explore other means of bringing peace in South Sudan as they have never been given chance since the war broke out in 2013, and thereafter, followed by peace talks, to talk freely.

The government and rebels have been put under intense pressure to bring peace, hence, ending up creating peace which sometime proves very disastrous. This is because the USA is blind to the truth that lasting peace can only be achieved through understanding and trust between the warring parties.

Instead, the USA is posed to ensure that the so-called protection troops are sent to South Sudan that will never be neutral as they will come and join opposition with the aim of changing the government and cause more human sufferings.

The USA and the UN should understand the war is not confined in Juba only and the protection force based in Juba will not achieve anything. Rather, what South Sudan needs currently is a comprehensive plan to bring peace throughout the country. This can only be achieved through leaving things as they are and then engage all parties, that is, the government and oppositions to talk freely in order to bring true peace.

However, despite the other arrangements by the African Union to bring peace to South Sudan as provided under the international law, the USA is ignoring such arrangements contrary to the UN Charter.

Article 52 (1) of the UN Charter provides for the regional arrangements for dealing with matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security.

The recent arrangement made by the African Union in the agreement of the government of South Sudan was in line with Article 52 (1) above but the UN under the supervision of the USA acted contrary to Article 52, which exposed the USA hidden agenda of seeing regime change in South Sudan not restoring peace in the country.

In fact, if the USA and the UN just wants peace to prevail in South Sudan not something more than that they would have taken advantage of the recent development and engage different opposition groups to rally behind the First Vice President, Mr. Taban, with the aim of creating the unified front to achieve lasting peace in South Sudan.

However, the way the USA and the UN are taking the issue of South Sudan is something that leaves much to be desired. It appears that the USA and the UN are bent to see the regime change whether by crooks or fair means.

Hence, in that regard, it is quite unfortunate that the UN and the USA have not learned from the first mistakes of regime change that they effected in different countries; notably, Iraq and Libya, which are now in more mess than before invasions and even more have become threats to the international peace.

It is now regretful to see the USA and the UN watching helplessly as Libya and Iraq have become sanctuaries of militants who unleash suicides mission as they wish, which further result in untold and uncontrolled human sufferings.

As it is well-known, the invasion of Libya and Iraq was coerced by the USA through the use of its financial muscles without a prior plan of what would come in the aftermath of such invasions, hence, plunging the two countries into messes and uncontrolled sea of human sufferings.

In reality, the protection force the USA is pushing on with regardless of other means is a sugarcoated invasion force as it is being done in disregard of other methods as already explained above and without the consent of South Sudan as provided under the international law.

Thus, the action of sending any force without the consent of South Sudan may constitute aggression under the international law, and South Sudan as a sovereign State, is entitled to reject such troops and instead mobilize other countries to treat such an action as pure invasion.

If South Sudan deems it fit and declares such an action of sending troops to South Sudan to be an invasion act, than it has a right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. This Article provides that nothing in the UN Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations.

As I know the USA very well, it has already manipulated the law to legalize its illegal action by pushing members of the Security Council to pass the resolution as it has already been done to provide a basis for its illegal action of sending troops to South Sudan.

However, once the action is illegal then it is illegal and nothing can cure illegality under the international law unless the action has its basis in the UN Charter.

For instance, when the USA wanted to invade Iraq in 2003, the USA ensured that her actions against Iraq were legalized through Security Council Resolution but that resolution in which the invasion of Iraq was sanctioned did not cure the illegal action against Iraq by the USA and the UK and the whole enterprise has remained illegal up to date.

In summary, the USA should immediately reconsider its move against South Sudan before it is too late. I know the USA will never look back unless it has achieved what it wants because it lives on Machiavellian principle of end justifies the means.

However the fact is that the indifference of the USA to other countries problems will not take away the moral blameworthiness of the USA under the international law.

The invasion of countries like Libya and Iraq and the planned South Sudan invasion may affect the standing of the USA and even in long run will have an effect on the UN as a body, which may lead to its collapse like what happened to the League of Nations in 1945.

One of the reasons for the collapse of the League of Nations in 1945 was unwarranted invasions of weaker nation by stronger nations. Hence, the USA and the UN must stay warn that they are digging cancerous holes in the UN system that may trigger its collapse in the long run.

NB// the Author is South Sudanese lawyer residing Uganda and can be reached through: +256783579256; or;

Can President Kiir Man Up Like President Nkurunziza This Time?

By: Simon Yel Yel, Juba, South Sudan, AUG/15/2016, SSN;

“No Nation has the right to make decisions for another nation; No people for another people,” Julius Kambarage Nyerere, from his ‘A Peaceful New Year’ speech given in Tanzania on 1 January 1968.

When patriotic South Sudanese look at the world, we see a swarm of threats and hatred. Threats that start from our region to the United States. Our neighboring countries including Uganda and Kenya are plausibly warming up for aggression against South Sudan any time at the behest of the United States.

There is no doubt that Washington and United Nations are extending their usual aggression on the pretext of promoting democracy, humanitarian assistance, human rights and protection of civilians as means of ousting independently-minded government of South Sudan.

Washington did it before to the leaders of countries which had refused to show deference to Washington such as Saddam of Iraq, Gaddafi of Libya and Assad of Syria.

What had happened on Friday night in the United Nations Security Council meeting is a rubber stamp of what IGAD countries framed in Ethiopia on 5th this month under the instruction of the United States.

Regrettably, our foreign policy makers have spectacularly failed to solve the arithmetic of diplomatic courtship equation of convincing just one permanent member of the UN Security Council to veto the United States sponsored proposal.

To the surprise of many people, our diplomats also failed to convince China. Many people couldn’t believe that China, the principal beneficiary of oil investment in South Sudan, has taken a neutral position and reservedly sat on fence folding its hands while its earphone is on listening to music.

Meanwhile Russia, the possible potential partner looks to be fatigued of always vetoing several United States sponsored proposals against South Sudan has decided to take a neutral position also.

The choice is now squarely up to the government to choose between rejecting the regional troops and face the arms embargo or accept the regional troops and there should be no arms embargo; in other words, it is a choice to choose between a rock and a hard place.

In fact, the IGAD countries have also a choice to choose whether to remain as a tool of the United States and bring their troops to invade South Sudan or follow the decision taken by the Sudan and Uganda governments not to be part of regional forces deployment in South Sudan.

If IGAD countries choose to be a tool, they will possibly taste the bitter reverberations in their countries and the region will experience the worst deadly civil war ever of massive scale and indeed the IGAD and East Africa Community will dichotomize.

It is an open secret that Washington is not run by idiots. But by the political elites who have consolidated their power and become accustomed to their status as the owners of the world. They act as they want; dividing the ruling elites of any country that they want to target and using money to bribe or buy the governments of neighboring countries of that targeted country; forcing unnecessary resolution on UNSC and handing over its execution to those neighboring countries to achieve the desired goal of the United states.

They build coalitions based on principle “if you are not with us, you are against us.” The self-speaking evidence is in Syria. The United States have used Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and others to fight Bashar Assad and now the United States wants to use Kenya and Ethiopia to fight Salva Kiir.

When it comes to Africa, our ruling elites don’t see what American ruling elites are doing. There is no Coalition or Organization in Africa that can protect its targeted member states. Lamentably, the ruling elites in Africa laxly decided to let Washington dip its hands into our affairs.

Burundi is the only country in Africa which said NO to the United States’ interference in its affairs. For the ruling elites in Burundi, to go from being a country that respects the sovereignty of another nation and negotiates on equal footing to one that decides destiny for another country is intolerable.

The ruling elites in Burundi have consolidated their power and they proved that they can’t be pushed by the United States and the United Nations whatsoever the case may be.

President Nkurunziza has bravely refused to be bullied by the UNSC and AU resolutions on sending troops to protect civilians. He tremendously proved to Washington and its puppets in Africa that he is the president, captain of Burundi and once rebel leader whose military mentality had not faded away.

He stood firm in rejecting the deployment of the regional troops and threatened to shoot them should they land in his country. Earlier this this month, he also rejected the UNSC resolution on sending 200 UN police to protect civilians. They are not bombed into oblivion and life is normal now in Burundi.

Contrast to our ruling elites in Juba, they failed to consolidate their power and they proved that they can easily be pushed back and forth by the United Nations and United States. Our ruling elites should leave off their current stance and try to ex-cogitate how the ruling elites in Burundi are handling their affairs.

In fact, after the President Bush left the White House, Kiir’s troubles immediately started but with pride and determination, he safely sailed the southern Sudan to the Republic of South Sudan in conditions of Washington interference to cause power wrangling in the SPLM party to oust him.

This interference is speculated to have been supercharged by the decision taken by the President Salva Kiir to continue with China as a contractor after the independence.

With the current unfolding state of affairs, Kiir must show the United Nations his military wit and prove to the world that he was once a rebel leader and President who can’t be aghast by war whatever magnitude it may be by rejecting the deployment of regional troops. Kiir must show firm stance on rejection of regional troops this time. Otherwise, he wouldn’t last for long.

Arguably, Kiir’s shifting stance on national and security issues is the loophole or ambiguity that many countries and the United Nations took for impuissance. If the phrase “The existence of UNMISS in the country is the first grave mistake” is an exaggeration, then the phrase “the usual unexpected shift of government’s stance on national and security issues nourishes the current state of affairs” reflects the current situation quite accurately in my opinion.

We are all aware that Obama wants to implement the Vision of New World Oder as he made it crystal clear on 24th March 2014 in Brussels when he addressed the EU leaders. He said “And for the international order that we have worked for generations to build. Ordinary men and women are too small-minded to govern their own affairs. That order and progress can only come when individuals surrender their rights to an all-powerful sovereign.”

Unfortunately, our neighboring countries refused to see and comprehend this clear language of the Washington. Obama wants us to surrender our rights and hard-won sovereignty of South Sudan to the Washington to govern us. But over my dead body, as long as South Sudanese women continue to procreate and as long as there are youth like me, Gatkuoth, Lado, Kenyi, Omer, Poni, Nyaruech and Atong, we will fight the Americans and their puppets till the end of the world.

We are independent nation and we shall never relinquish our sovereignty to any nation even if it threatens or bombs us into oblivion.

It is very clear and apparent that the United States and United Nations have a long history of invading countries selling their aggressive wars to the people as “humanitarian intervention, protection of civilians or democracy operations”.

From Yugoslavia to Somalia, from Yemen to Libya, from Iraq to Afghanistan, from Ivory Coast to Congo, and now in South Sudan, the United States and the United Nations have intervened under various false pretexts and the result is always the same, destroyed states, changed the regimes, killed the presidents by hanging or firing squad, arrested and jailed the presidents in the ICC, and massive casualties.

In other words, it is the implementation of the Washington “shoot-to-feed” program of looting resources. Washington invaded and destroyed Iraq, Libya and other countries purely because of the Oil they were bestowed with.

If African leaders don’t stand up to stop this budding American colonization and lust for other countries’ natural resources, such evil acts will never stop as long African leaders fear the United States as an undisputed hegemony.

One of the most obstinate about African leaders is that no matter how many countries the United States illegally invades, exploits, threatens, kills people, ousts the regimes or colonizes around the globe including Africa, they still cling to the delusion that the United States is a “ force for good” in the world and adore it.

African leaders must understand that that the serious threat to regional peace most certainly is not Nkurunziza, Salva Kiir nor Robert Mugabe but the United States sponsored aggressions through the United Nations targeting their countries.

In conclusion, it is worth recalling the joke that President Salva Kiir once said in 2014 in Rumbek. He said “during the liberation days when I was a commander of Tiger division, people used to fear me a lot. But now they don’t fear me again, I don’t know whether it is because I have hidden my claws of Tiger inside the paw or what? And if so, then I will remove out my claws.”

I think this is a right time for the President Salva Kiir to prove to the United States, United Nations and our neighboring countries that he once has claws of Tiger and still he has them.

For the President Salva Kiir to conveniently prove to the United States and United Nations and indeed to South Sudanese to know that he has claws of Tiger is only if he: speeds up the integration process of SPLM-IO into the National Army; makes sure that Riek Machar is six (6) feet down the ground in the shortest time possible; relocates the UNMISS 50 miles away from Juba; Never give in to deployment of regional troops; and organizes a nationwide massive youth recruitment into the SPLA.

President Salva Kiir must recall that we fought against Arabs for over four decades because of colonialism and South Sudan is not a donation from the UN or United States but a nation which cost 2.5 million lives to be a sovereign country. We shall never give a damn to whoever wants to colonize us, be a white man or black white-hearted man.

No nation has the right to make a decision for another nation. Can President Salva Kiir this time man up like President Nkurunziza and say NO TO REGIONAL TROOPS DEPLOYMENT ONCE AND FOR ALL?

Simon Yel Yel is the co-editor of the book of the President Salva Kiir’s speeches and essential writings published as “Salva Kiir Mayardit: The Joshua of South Sudan”. He can be reached at or 0955246235.

Peace and Stability can return to South Sudan as result of Good Political Discourse

BY: Gabriel Pager Ajang, Political Science and History Instructor, USA, 11/AUG/2016, SSN;

US President Washington knew it better than many of his successors, peace and stability are more important than the presidency. James Madison, vice president and Thomas Jefferson, his secretary of state disagreed while serving in Washington administration. They disagreed over policies and directions the United States could take at that time.

Nevertheless, Washington did not like political parties. He did not like the fact that Jefferson and Madison had formed their own parties. And he articulated his points at his Farewell Address Speech to the nation. He declared that he would not seek second time for presidency because that would not serve national interest—it can only play into simmering divisions and conflicts.

He alluded in his speech that he never wanted to be part of political parties. He suggested that he was better off to remain above national politics and a true nationalist. He thought that his accomplishments were enough to solidify his legacy, at least in his opinions: he led the revolutionary war, won and gained independence. Washington allowed Jefferson and Madison to engage citizens in political discourse that would be vital to America’s political history for centuries to come.

Washington knew very well that United States constitution provides political parties a forum for debate, liberty and election. Hence he delineated his opinions from constitution. Those very decisions Washington made were fundamental to peace and stability at the inception of United States. Citizens were given voice and rights to political participation from the onset.

This is vital to emphasize because once you eliminate voices of people from national discourse you risk conflict and war. So as long as leaders of South Sudan focus what game can be employed and who can be employed to get which constituencies as means of clinging to power– war and instability would continue to define South Sudan future.

Only honest political discourse among leaders and citizens can bring peace and stability to South Sudan not allocation of positions among elites.

Therefore appointing Riek as vice president, deployment of security forces to Juba and silencing voices of citizens in pivotal political discourse would never bring peace and stability.

Peace and stability would come to South Sudan when leaders stop backroom deals, bargain games and be honest to the nation. Peace and stability would return to South Sudan —when people are given forum to voice their opinions and their rights.

There is no normal citizen that would support a government that does not give salt to you or your family. Country is not something that people wear on their sleeves…it is a tool that provides families with health care, security, education, roads, housing and many more but if the government does not provide basic need, citizens to have options to find other leaders.

Apparently, South Sudan had accomplished the following since time of Dinosaur:
1. To his credits, Kiiir had achieved destruction of Riek Machar’s career and his dreams of presidency. And I may add, Riek’s career was destroyed at expense of all citizens’ lives and national resources. Why would you sacrifice so many lives for a person you can beat in an election. My own dad would beat Riek in an election let alone Kiir mayardit.

2. United States government had built tarmac road between juba and Nimule.
South Sudan government hasn’t implemented any of her ambitious programs since 2005 and it simply has not because it lacks capacity building and institutions to deliberate on real issues. Insane citizens can wear their sovereignty on their sleeves but the current sovereignty does not exist if the country does not offer basic security.

The government had a responsibility to protect all her citizens and if the government does not protect its citizens, it loses her sovereignty. This is reminiscent of miscarriage, once your wife lost her first unborn child; you are not called a father of child.

It a political suicide to en gage in a political discourse that yields no results at all. Not a single statements from Juba pertaining South Sudan’s aspirations had been proved to be true….and that alone is concerning. It concerns me for senior government officials to be saying. A lie travels faster than truth and history proves that truth win at the end. Only truth will bring peace and stability to South Sudan.

It is self-deprivation to think that the country belongs to you and you have all rights to silence particular groups of communities who have equally sacrificed like you in the liberation struggles. It is self-defeating and destruction to think that if I constantly lie to the world and citizens, they would believe me. It is self-defamation to continue to say that these groups are the most corrupt in South Sudan, for instance G10, when you–yourself is corrupt to the core.

I would certainly agree that challenges and issues facing South Sudan are becoming problematic and complex each day. It is now very clear that South Sudanese people have legitimatized and affirmed division as a powerful tool of governing a state.

Tribalism is used to inject fear into citizens. The fear of unknown has clouded South Sudan since 2005. Citizens of South Sudan are brained washed to solely secure the principal leaders.

Dinka and Nuer are lionized to finish each other while leaders watch it like movie on a television. Folks killed themselves and their killing is affirmed and legitimatized by Juba and Fagak Leaders and their surrogates advanced hatreds to maintain powers. Juba surrogates argued that Riek is a terrorist and monster. The man had killed people in 1991. This argument was not engineered by Bor intellectuals. It was started in early 2013 by people like Gordon Buay and his cohorts in Nuer community, folks who saw it best for them to push Riek off the rail of leadership to get employments. They didn’t know that this saga would cost lives. This idea that Riek would stage a coup d’état to secure state arsenals was sold to Juba surrogates. It was never within to stage a coup when majority long for free and fair election.
The fear of unknown that engulfed Kiir‘s Kitchen cabinet was escalated by Awuwau (preemptive fear). Kiir’s administration continues to be restless. Juba restless forced them to accuse Mach Pual, Dr. Majak D’Agoot, and Oyai Deng Ajak of coup. It gradually became clearer that these Lieutenant Generals had never organized even unit of 50 men and women to secure presidency. Evident of their false accusation became apparent after their court in case of South Sudan vs. the detainees. So these Lt. Generals were declared not guilty. In the light of South Sudan dissension to tribalism and abyss, president Kiir groomed Dr. Riek Machar and deceptively gave him gesture of even succeeding him. In normal democracy, presidents are mostly succeeded by their vice presidents through contested elections.
Nevertheless, Kiir appointed Riek as a vice president in 2005. He entrusted him with South Sudan affairs while serving as vice president of Sudan. 1991 SPLM/A split that resulted Bor massacre, a case that was not contextualized in vetting for vice president. Hence, Kiir appointed Riek as vice president in 2005. But 1991 should have been used as litmus test for his appointment but it was disregarded. Good leaders get thing right from onset because walking backward work to derail the nation and it is an illustration of incompetent in leadership and decision-making. Subsequent to 2005, the fear of unknown kicked in because the SPLA was flooded by the Rebels of Peter General, Gatdet Yak, L.t, general, Paulino Matip Nhial, L.t, General Monytuil, Gabriel Tanginya, Olony and many others.
War broke out in 2013 in presidential guards—it started because of fear of unknown. Guards of Riek, Matip and Kiir fought for almost a week in the capitol-Juba. Riek called for national army to overthrow the national government. Immediately, three states of Upper Nile were embroiled in vicious conflict. Three capitols of these states were completely annihilated in periods of two months. Fagak propagandists and surrogates succeeded to convince white army to ransack Bor Town, and other youth were told to attack Malakal and Bentiu. Riek lured white army to attack Juba. Joint operations of Juba and Kampala unleashed deadliest on attack untrained youth. These children of South Sudan were badly defeated by joint fighting.
The international and regional states leaders call for moratorium on conflict and cessation of hostilities. Juba and Fagak lend no hear. The rival leaders and surrogates found their voices in deceptions and slowly became lucrative. Juba created among South Sudanese people and wielded her messages and policies on the premise that Rebels leader, Riek is being supported by the WEST. Little did they know that the West lost interest South Sudan let alone supporting a leader that had blood on his hands. Fagak surrogates found their voices on NGUNDENG, a prophet that had prophesied that Riek Machar would be president of South Sudan. Little did they know that—even in fair and free election, Riek would have a hard time to win let alone fighting wars—he had never won single battle? In 1991 and 2013, Riek won few battles but never maintained those cities for a year. Riek and Kiir entered into peace negotiation to end the bloodiest civil war in South Sudan. The two principals signed agreement to form a transitional government, with Kiir president and Riek vice president.
Dr. Riek sent his messiah, Taban Deng Gai to Juba to prepare his way. While in Juba, Taban cozy up with Kiir and Nhial Deng to build mutual and exclusive relationships, while Riek enjoyed his security in Fagak with dried old men and unenlightened youths killed themselves. Kiir, Taban, Nhial and IGAD leaders persuaded Riek to come to Juba—to possibly implement the signed provisions. Riek came to Juba in 2016, —- President Kiir reappointed as a vice president as stipulated in the accord. The two leaders had one month in Juba and not scheduling one physical meeting. The Kiir and Riek were told and pressed by IGAD and friends of South Sudan to meet because of developing unhealthy and dangerous brewing environments. They agreed and met at the presidential palace.
Because of fear of UNKNOWN, miscommunication, and coup allegations led to another war. Kiir was advised to protect Riek because killing him would ignite international outcries or his advice come as a result of fear of UNKNOWN. Hence, Riek was protected in Juba but as soon as he went to bush, he became Bin Laden. Apparently, they did not know that Bin Laden is Bin Laden whether in Juba or Jungle. We need each other. Calling some a rebel and pushing him away by making bizarre statements does not solve our problems. In fact it escalates hatred and divisions.
Sequences of 2016 Conflict Claims
First claim: It was believed that the low level SPLA/M/O generals/guards set a false alarm and circulated a message in the SPLA/M/O headquarter that Riek Machar was arrested. They alleged that the meeting between Riek and Kiir was not actually a meeting; it was orchestrated platform to arrest Riek.
Second Claim: Fighting erupted at the presidential palace in Juba. Kiir and Riek made a joint statement, asserting that both of them were not aware of what caused conflict. They went on a state national television and called for national calm, the Two warring parties restrained from fighting and they finally vowed to implement peace agreement.
Third claim: Kiir provided Riek with bulletproof vehicle, guards to protect him and was transported to his house.
Fourth claim: Juba Coup narratives, Riek Machar came to the meeting with pistol. He ordered his guards to kill president Kiir. Machar’s headquater was attacked and his base was captured.
Fifth claim: Riek was given 48 hours to come and assume his roles as a vice president. After no show, SPLM/O poliburos and NLC convened and replaced chairman of SPLA/M/O, Riek Machar with Lt.general Taban Deng Gai. Taban was sworn in as vice president of Sudan.
Sixth claim: Machar became a private citizen and government cannot pursue a private citizen, said Ateny Wek.
Essentially, Kiir is not just Salva Kiir Mayardit from Awan. He is state man, the symbol of our nation and president of South Sudan. Hence, protecting him is paramount. Kiir Mayar and all the presidents around this world would agree with me that if Machar had indeed staged a coup, all the appropriate military and security operation would have been applied in such situation. The coup orchestrator could have been arrested or killed…it is bizarre to protect a coup plotter. So why president kiir did provides guards to protect Machar if he indeed staged a coup? It is puzzling to me and many leaders around the world.
We, citizens need to start building trust among tribes and leaders. Trust has been erased by our leaders among south Sudanese tribes. In Juba, leaders working for the same government fear, they fear of themselves, citizens and competence well informed citizens. How can we bridge tribal gap, engineer trust to stabilize South Sudan and bring lasting peace? How can we overcome tribal hatreds? This is not easy to do folks. Our country is fundamentally more important than current leaders that would leave leadership anytime. It is about time to speak in unison to end war and call for peace because any minor war makes our country weak and make president Kiir even weaker. This extremism that being shown in in the country and in peace process and it is not part of peace and caring, it will place the country on the wrong hands. Political elites focus on positions metric and division of positions and do not look onto their suffering citizens. This idea of awarding themselves with positions first before peace isn’t reflective of stewardship and faith people entrust in them. Peace among citizens is ultimately and principally important than peace among leaders. Killing Riek or replacing can never bring peace and stability to South Sudan.

Gabriel Pager Ajang, Political Science and History Instructor
He can be reached

Why Pres. Kirr Needs to Reverse His Actions Before It Is Too Late!

BY: Dr. Gatluak Ter Thach, USA, AUG/04/2016, SSN;

Pres. Kirr and his First Vice-Pres. Taban have to decide faster before it is too late what they wanted the world to act on –either with them or against them– it is their choice. The actions they have taken violated the peace they claimed still holds.

If they meant a temporary replacement of FVP position and nothing else, which is obvious now that it was not the case, they should have atoned the provisions that are core components for the survival of the peace agreement.

Saying they still wanted to implement the peace while at the same time are strongly violating the provisions of the agreement is hypocrisy.

Vice-Pres. Taban also said he would not allow the nation to remain retaining two separate armies during the transitional period. This, by itself, is a huge violation of the security arrangement of the August peace agreement which he personally negotiated because it would undermine and weaken the smooth integration of unfriendly forces to a trusted and unified national army.

This would exploit and prolong the instability in the country since unfriendly forces would not feel comfortable and safer with such an action as it would emasculate and compromise their security.

Mr. Salva and Mr. Taban “illegally” removed members of the transitional government ministers of IO and members of Legislative Assembly of whom they deemed are not in the same club with and appointed their club members. This is also an enormous violation because these people left out or are not returning to the city for their safety, and they should not be released even if they disagreed with the move.

Mr. Kirr already handpicked a speaker of the parliament within a week and a deputy, a move that does not apply to the provision within the signed agreement.

The consensus is that the peace in South Sudan is dead and if there is anything left or has to be reborn it will be differently reinforced than how it had been implemented in Juba. Already now, the region and the international community has disagreed with Mr. Kirr actions and have already de-recognized Mr. Taban as FVP and wanted Mr. Kirr to reverse the action or else, I guess.

Will Mr. Kirr and Mr. Taban continue to deafen the calls and perpetual rejections of their inhospitable actions or will they notice the calls and reverse their violations?

How about those tricked to accept static positions—will they wait until it is too late with Mr. Kirr and Mr. Taban or will they show leadership and say they are better than the positions?

As I stated previously on my timeline, “It is during a time of crises” that a real person’s conscience is known. I thank those who have shown principles of doing the “right things.”

It is not one’s word that counts but their actions! At a time like this, everyone’s deeds will be noticed, come day or night. Can you, God, please protect innocent people in South Sudan?

Dr. Gatluak Ter Thach lives and works in Nashville Tennessee. Email:

The Question of Sovereignty: Does it trump over human rights and lives of the innocent in South Sudan?

BY: Ocholamero Otir Bure Oroto*, 03/AUG/2016, SSN;

In this essay I would like those who read between the lines to understand that the additional troops as buffer zone is to ensure political solution prevails. This will save lives of thousands and prevent the negative impacts that follows militaristic approach that seems to prevail in South Sudan. Without such approach or related avenues, South Sudan is definitely going the wrong path and it is a failure of proper role of a sovereign state.

“Sovereignty no longer exclusively protects States from foreign interference; it is a charge of responsibility that holds States accountable for the welfare of their people.”(1)

The killing of innocent people right from 2013 across the country, the violation of human rights, the disrespects of human lives has brought the country to the spotlight of the concerned global citizens and international organs.

Think of human lives, think about human rights, think about the innocents who have died and those who will continue to die, how about the raping of women, raping of young ladies. Do mental calculations of the sums of the suffering of the people of South Sudan due to the war that could have been prevented right at the office of Sudan People Liberation Movement/Army. These are realities that make a humane person to accept intervention as the only best alternative to the current lack of security and rampant unidentified gunmen.

Sovereignty rest with the people. It is the duty of government to protect citizens from each other. Ensuring that no one! NO ONE! could take someone’s life. Sovereignty and legitimacy of government depends on fulfilling its roles as protectors of citizens’ lives.

“Thomas Hobbes wrote in his social contract theory that it is the duty of governments to protect citizens from each other. If the government fails to perform at least its most basic function of keeping its citizens safe, then it is no longer a legitimate government, as it has reneged on its agreement in the social contract. It is surely the case in countries which violate human rights, often through murder or genocide, that those governments are no longer legitimate, as they are no longer keeping their citizens safe”(2).

Thinking of the loves one who perished during the last 2.5 years or so, thinking of the human resources killed over the periods, anyone with moral values and who values lives, anyone who respects lives would find it difficult to say no to the help of the global goodwill to come and provide help and protections to the remaining citizens and curve avenues for political solutions.

It is proven that the leaders will hardly die of the war they are engineering but sons and daughters, mothers and fathers, grandfathers and grandmothers grandchildren of other poor and helpless South Sudanese who are just going about their daily lives are caught by surprise and either killed, rape and tortured in one way or another.

Think about the effects of killing one person. Think about the effects of killings hundreds people, think about the effects of killing thousands. Now think about losing your loves one and put yourself in the shoes of those who are going through these situations.

Take the truth from this piece and leave what is of no use. Whatever view expressed here will remain on record. South Sudan cannot improve for better without the people defining what their ‘needs’ are. I am aware sometime people are pushed by situation to fight, but, where there is choice, political solutions are the best approach as a short and long term solutions.

Is it a good thing to have external body to get into South Sudan as a third party that will protect and maintain security in the process of implementation of the peace agreement?

If the world finally think it is about time they do something to protects the civilians from the manmade disaster and the mess in South Sudan, I, personally, as a citizen who loves peaceful lifestyles, would welcome the idea. So, it is a good thing. In the current case, I welcome the idea with a mandate that will ensure political solutions to prevail.

It is therefore vital to note that ‘Sovereignty does not trump human rights, rather quite the opposite is true'(2), because, sovereignty rest with the people. The argument that additional troops to act as buffer zones will interfere with sovereignty have no weight at this particular moment considering the situations of South Sudan. Let me draw your attention to the following passage. I hope it will trigger your desire to follow up on your liberty.


United Nations (UN) Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon established the three-pillar framework of the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP, R2P), in his 2009 Report Implementing the Responsibility to Protect:

Pillar One: The state bears the primary responsibility to protect their population from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.
Pillar Two: The international community, i.e. the UN, regional organizations, governments and civil society, must assist states in fulfilling their protection obligations.
Pillar Three: When a state manifestly fails to protect its population or is in fact the perpetrator of these crimes, the international community has a responsibility to take collective action in a timely and decisive manner to prevent or halt the commission of mass atrocities. Such action must be on a case-by-case basis using a broad range of political, economic, and humanitarian measures, and should peaceful means prove inadequate, coercive measures, including the use of force as authorized by the Security Council and in accordance with the UN Charter (3).

South Sudan situation is without doubt considered in the third pillar as depicted above. The failure of the creation of good respectful system right from 2005 up to now rest overtly on the top Sudan People Liberation Army/Movement. Instead of Justice, Equality and Prosperity, South Sudanese are greeted by atrocities caused by those they trust would govern the country well.

Tentative Recommendations:

The leaders of South Sudan should respect lives and human rights.
The leaders should put aside the mentality of trying to defeat each other by guns.
The leaders should accept and embark on dialogues as the ongoing method of ironing their differences.
The leaders should lead in peace building and national building.
The leaders should devise mechanism to protects people from other citizens who takes pride in harming others.
The leaders should find out their needs and identify other ways of achieving those needs without going to war.
Embrace peace, respect each other, promote peace and reconciliation.
The leaders should quest for avenues to resolves the issues once and for all politically.
People should learn quickly to support what is right for the entire nation.


Therefore, doing the above among other, will build trust and ensure progress as opposed to continuing with war. The onus is on the leaders; the leaders need to show civility in handling dispute in peaceful manner. The best way to say no to the intervention in the words of my colleague is to ‘STOP war, preach peace, reconcile…’ above all, embark on overhaul political reformation in South Sudan.

This is where people will morally work to reconstruct the country. If these fair steps are not taken, there is no reason to say no to the international body. They should act quickly to rescue people from the current canine environment.

*A concerned citizen driven by moral urge. For better or for worst, collectively, we have choice to make. South Sudan will be a better country if we collectively aim to break the cycle of revenge killings and break the cycle of violence. May peace one day be realized in South Sudan with greater respect of diversity.
Email: Facebook: Ocholamero Otir Bure Oroto.


1. United Nation (2016). Office of the special advisors on the prevention of genocide. Retrieved from on 21/07/2016.

2. Ringer, Ryan (2006). In defense of others: Does Sovereignty Trump Human Rights? Retrieved from on 28/04/2016.

3.ICRtoP International Coalition to the Responsibility to Protect At a Glance an educational tool by the international coalition for the responsibility to protect (2016). Retrieved from on 21/07/2016.

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:

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 or +211955246235.

A Professional Liar with international Audiences: A Response Eric Reeves’s concocted Saga

BY: James Nguen, CANADA, JUL/15/2016, SSN;

Eric Reeves is a Senior Fellow at Harvard University’s Francois-Xavier Bagnoud Centre for Health and Human Rights and a professor of English Language and Literature at Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts.

Surprisingly, he has built his credentials as an advocate, analysis and researcher on the Sudan’ problem based on concocted lies, promoted by Eric’s self-centred hatred against Sudanese Muslims in present Republic of Sudan.

For decades, most of Reeves’s untested lies on the Sudan’s problems and who should be blame for such ordeals has given Eric leverages and exponential supports among South Sudanese not because they were truth stories but because they serves their political interests.

The only audiences unaware of this are Eric Reeves’ international audiences. Particularly well wishes Christians who truly meant to help South Sudanese people. These God’s people were lied to by Eric, BIG TIME.

In numerous occasions, it became apparently clear that Professor Reeves is feeding his international audiences relentlessly without remorse while South Sudanese continued to avoid confrontation with Eric because his lies served their political interests during the war and thus has worked perfectly well for them.

For one, Eric Reeves comes from white privileged background, and it also happened he is a professor at Northampton College, which helped masked his central hatred for Muslims in the Sudan and white lie with straight face.

Because Eric has strong hatred against Muslims in the Sudan, this coupled with the fact that South Sudanese military elites were fighting Khartoum in the 1990s and desperately needed a deceitful while American of Eric Reeves’ characters and status, to help them sell their political agenda in Washington. Eric was a perfect recruit and helped served and fulfilled such interests role for the SPLM/A.

Within short span of time, Reeves became a magnet crusader for South Sudan’s political agenda and a launch pad to galvanize Americans’ faith groups, particularly Christians supporting South Sudan’s causes based on fabricated truth. One example that stood out is the “slave children redemption project” in Northern Bhar El Ghazal in the 1990s. This project was sponsored by well wishes Christians around the globe based on loved for humanity, unaware that Eric was part and parcel fabricating it.

This tact of deception worked well following dramatized emotional charged based on lies and misinformation. Unchallenged, some unfounded lies from Eric became real truths for Eric Reeves’ international audiences.

Under this perfect marriage between Reeves and the SPLM/A, Reeves thrived and gained fame and he became a bridge, “go to man” between Sudanese and those who wanted to help them on humanitarian ground while unaware about Eric’s lie about what was really happening in the Sudan.

I must reinstate that all South Sudanese both at home and aboard were well versed about this deceitful political marriage between Reeves and South Sudan military wings. Our people were reluctant correcting Eric’s lies purposely because such lies served a strategic political interest for South Sudan rebels.

This reluctant gave Reeves ample ground to keep misinforming his international audiences with unfounded truths on the Sudan’ wars including the 2003 Darfur’s crisis where Reeves has written intensively including claimed of genocide. (

For example, on June 17, 2013, Reeves misinformed his audiences by writing an outright lie that Khartoum has no evidence that Juba was supporting the SPLA-N, JEM and SLA rebels when in fact, we the people of South Sudan have full knowledge that Sudanese rebels had and still have their bases in Unity State and Upper Nile States and still being supported militarily by Juba.

It’s unfortunate that a Senior Fellow at Harvard University’s Francois-Xavier Bagnoud Centre for Health and Human Rights and a professor of English Language and Literature at Smith College can lie this bluntly with straight face to his international audiences without allowing a room for marginal error or a possibility of being caught.

Reeves wrote:

“the Khartoum regime, including its SAF and intelligence services, has never publicly provided a shred of evidence that Juba is providing material military support to rebels operating in Sudan, neither the Sudan People Liberation Army -North (SPLM-N) or the larger coalition known as the Sudan Revolutionary Front which comprises rebels group from Darfur…JEM and Sudan Liberation Army (SLM).”

Who would believe that Eric Reeves could be lying with such a straight face? No one of course, because South Sudanese who know this lies by heart were politically sympathetic and had vested interests to Eric’s negative campaign.

Because Reeves lied too many times, for 3 decades without getting caught, on July 10, 2016, he wrote a falsified piece on South Sudan’s recent crisis, titled “A coup in the making in South Sudan – led by Riek Machar.” I just gathered that he has long retracted it after being caught lying by South Sudanese.

Because Reeves lied too many times, he erroneously thinks that he can lied about South Sudan’s affairs without being caught and held accountable. Eric Reeves is a perfect liar with international audiences and must be challenge and held accountable for 3 decades long of misinformation.

Furthermore, Reeves has claimed to have had received a “highly reliable sources” from a devious source in Addis Abba, Ethiopia that Dr. Riek Machar was leading a coup to topple Salva Kiir’s government. I like to assure my audiences that this is not accurate but manufactured truth and Eric has retracted it because he was caught lying.

In this context Eric Reeves has not bothered providing a written reference or recorded audio to help prove the lie because he believed that he is a professional liar and invincible.

All he has provided was a loose subjective statement that has no trace. And yet still think that “a highly reliable source.” The quote goes as “ a highly reliable sources—currently in the region and with extensive experience in South Sudan over many years—reports from Addis Ababa this evening that a coup in Juba is being led by Riek Machar, First Vice-President of the Government of South Sudan.”

With this statement, one cannot help but to conclude that Professor Eric Reeves is a pathetic liar. Although he has withdrawn this statement, Eric has lied to American people, the world, about Darfur and now South Sudan, therefore he must be held accountable.

Another concocted statement from Eric Reeves is his claim that “my source also informs me that Riek Machar has asked the Khartoum regime for more weapons and military assistance” by referring only to alleged August 31, 2014 published by none other than Eric Reeves himself.

Honourable people would ask where is Mr. Eric Reeves’ verification Dr. Riek talked to Khartoum on July 9, 2016and has asked for military assistance.

Rice Reeves further claimed that there was an ‘intercepted communications, a full-scale assault by General James Koang Chuol is expected to begin early tomorrow. This will be in the addition to the extremely intense fighting that descended upon Juba today (Sunday, July 10, 2016).” Again, where is audio record that was intercepted by the alleged communicator?

By all account, this alleged “intercepted communication” is more than a lie but proved diversion strategic which essentially serves to prepare a ground for Juba to proceed with their plan to “capture or kill” Dr. Riek and his commanders.

In this case, it’s good to point out that Eric is not just a liar but an accomplice who was part and parcel of the plan to kill Dr. Riek and commanders in Juba on Sunday July 10, 2016.

In yesterday Eric Reeves’ retraction statement, he has also lied again about General Peter Gatdet’s stronghold being Leer County in Unity State.

“There are alarming reports from the ground in Juba, by those working with humanitarian operations, indicating that Leer in Unity State (stronghold of Peter Gadet) has seen a sharp deterioration in security, with significant armed clashes between the SPLA-IO and SPLA.”

This is again another bloody lie of today replacing a white lie of yesterday. For one, General Peter Gatdet Yak has no stronghold in Leer County Unity State since he part ranks with Dr. Riek in 2015. To prove that Eric is again lying, he didn’t mentioned which international humanitarian he has talked to in South Sudan because there none.

In closing, Eric Reeves is undoubtedly a professional liar with international audiences. He has been lying about the Sudan’s problems for 3 decades. It’s about time for people to distance themselves from pathetic liar.

Another important point that people must know about Eric Reeves is that he is not just a liar but an agent bribed to lie with straight face by political and military elites within the government of South Sudan.

J. Nguen is a South Sudanese political commentator living in Canada. He can be reached at

IGAD-PLUS and UN’s “We condemn & call on both sides” unnecessary Language: Causes of the Latest Flaring War!

By: Bol Khan, South Sudan, JUL/12/2016, SSN;

Unsurprisingly, the 8th Friday foiled attempt turned yesterday Sunday July, 2016 to be all out-war on innocent South Sudanese People. South Sudan is set ablaze yet again by the same leaders of 15 December 2013! In short, whether we term it intentional or unintentional the IGAD-PLUS imposed Compromise Peace Agreement (the ARCISS) offered a window of great opportunity for South Sudan’s destroyers to continue the war on innocent South Sudanese innocent people. Why?

Firstly, because that agreement has permitted the same people who planned, instigated, conspired, committed, abetted, participated and executed 15 December 2013 deadly incident in the heart of national capital, Juba, to rule the country again in this deadly defunct Transitional period.

Palpably, Justice was delayed and nobody knew as to when it would have taken place. Secondly, all the national or regional blocs including the JMCC, CTSMM, JMEC, IGAD-PLUS, the International Community and the UN were not doing enough to end the sufferings in this country.

Instead they have been all along resorting to this verbal language of “We/I condemn in the strongest term possible & urge the two parties to the agreement to respect this and that” without naming exactly the responsible person (s) for December 15 2013 war or who was really violating the later imposed compromise peace agreement.

These two things encouraged and gave criminals/peace violators strengths to kill, violate the agreement in broad day light and go away untouched in the presence the above national, regional and international institutions. That was before and after the so-called Agreement on Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (ARCISS).

In fact, legalizing the lifespan of the same leader (s) in power, through an agreement, so that he remains seated in the Presidential Palace was entirely against the majorities’ wills of South Sudanese people.

It was only good news for those devils in details that are standing out there. For the agreement awarded them bachelors and masters degrees for successful killings they carried out in Juba in 2013, later on in Greater Upper Nile, Greater Equatoria, recently in Wau….and now all over South Sudan. Unluckily, the gunmen with their recent legalized and intrigue—now sinking political leadership have had high hope that they would continue carrying out their deadly games for next dysfunctional transitional period of thirty (30) months up to 2018/9.

This will not happen; since they have set the national capital on fire again yesterday Sunday 10th July, 2016.

The IGAD-PLUS before imposing peace on South Sudanese people needed to recall that, on the outset of that 21 months senseless war the press Officials in the Palace could vow that all culprits who physically involved in massacring the pure innocent civilians in various parts of the country had been identified, apprehended and arrested.

And that very soon would appear or be taken to military court of justice. Did that happen? A big NO must be the answer! We haven’t seen them being taken to court for trails. That was palpable impunity in action!!

And that was the main reason why all, during the peace talks in Addis Ababa, South Sudanese civil society organizations, faith based groups and grassroots were appealing to peace mediators that bringing back the same person (s) who ordered 15 December 2013 mass killings, on top of the government, would be tantamount to carrying on the war.

In this, the IGAD member’ states, other regional and International partners could not listen to those concerning voices. Instead, they intentionally ignored the calls from the people of South Sudan who knew very well that the SPLM ruling party leaders had miserably failed the country.

With a total failure beyond repair! Now here are the people being flared again, what will they do to safeguard the lives of those innocent people?

Equally or sadly, the UN’s unnecessary impartial language of “WE/I CONDEMN IN THE STRONGEST TERM POSSIBLE AND URGE TWO PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT TO RESPECT THE AGRREMENT” without naming the exact obstructers plus its soft stance towards South Sudan’s obvious perpetrators was the second reason which indirectly encouraged the perpetrators in South Sudan.

This very language was allowing the leaders to hide their subordinates—the culprits or perpetrators in the pockets. Now that the South Sudan is set ablaze again by those so-called legitimate and democratically elected people in the Presidency; will JMEC, IGAD-PLUS and the UN continue acting even-handed towards South Sudan’s peace violators and civilians serial killers?

As stipulated in Chapter VII 2.7 of ARCISS, JMEC was supposed to:
(a). Monitor and oversee all aspects of the implementation of the Agreement;
(b). Monitor and oversee the mandate and tasks of the Transitional Government of National Unity, including the adherence of the Parties to the agreed timelines and implementation schedule;
(c). Oversee all work of Pre-Transitional and Transitional institutions and mechanisms created by the Agreement;
(d) Break deadlocks within the TGoNU, as per the provisions of Chapter VII, Article 6 of the Agreement;
(e). Publicize its work, conduct public outreach to the people of South Sudan, and ensure that the progress of implementation of the Agreement is widely disseminated;
(f). Report regularly to…., the Chairperson of the IGAD Council of Ministers, the Chairperson of the African Union Commission, the Peace and Security Council of the African Union, and to the Secretary- General and Security Council of the United Nations on the status of implementation of this Agreement, as provided for in the Agreement;
(g). In the event of any non-implementation of the mandate and tasks of the TGoNU or any of the Pre-Transitional and Transitional institutions and mechanisms created by the Agreement, or any other serious deficiencies, recommend appropriate corrective action to the TGoNU, and/or remedial action to the national and international institutions named above and in Chapter VII, Article 5 of the Agreement;
(h) In the event the TGoNU fails to take such remedial actions, the Chairperson shall report such matters with recommendations to the other bodies as stated in the “1 (h and i)” of this TOR.

Despite all these international back-up responsibilities bestowed on JMEC by the agreement, the JMEC was unable to break the fierce stalemate between the two main warring parties. And it was unable too, to follow the process as stipulates in Chapter VII Article 2.7.5 of ARCISS.

Even the substantial key issues which should have been implemented earlier had to hang up all behind scheduled. This substantial keys issues include but not limited to determination of number of States; reinstatement of Civil Servants, identification of cantonment areas in Equatoria and Bahr el Ghazel regions, the expansion of Transitional National Legislative Assembly, the security arrangement in cities like Juba, Malakal, Bentiu, Bor, establishment of Hybrid court…etc.

Contrary, without interruption the peace violators were so busy arresting peace observers, killings innocent civilians in Wau, targeting individuals in Central, Western and Eastern Equatoria States and all over the country. With high impunity, the certain individuals in TGoNU have been obstructing and impeding peace process yet the JMEC, IGAD-PLUS & the UN could not be able to point even a single figure at those obstructive group.

The devils were continue organizing themselves and start shooting civilians in front of JMEC, IGAD-PLUS, UNMISS and other International Community without punishment. And once these regional blocs, international community and the UN saw killings happened to civilians all of them would run to their computers and write condemnation Press releases always carry titles:

“I/we condemn……in the strongest term possible…..I am/we deeply alarmed……I/we call upon the parties involve….I am/we’re very concerned….I/we urge the both warring parties to refrain…..immediately stop hostilities or stop targeting civilians…….etc. Should these press releases help the subjugated innocent South Sudanese civilians from the hands of perpetrators? If the press releases can save lives as we speak, then let them save the lives of South Sudanese innocent people!!

Nowadays, the truth of the matter is that. Juba gunmen are now targeting everybody including the international members from the family of “WE CONDEMN IN STRONGEST TERM POSSIBLE”. Thousands of South Sudanese are now displaced some into UNMISS camps in Juba with other more displaced into the bushes, other stranded indoors all without basic services.

The December 15 2013 and this latest war’s starters are not sparing this time all 63 tribes’ members including those who have been in allies with them.

Does pointing figures at Peace violators become partiality?

“If an elephant has it foot on mouse tail and you said that you are neutral then the mouse will not recognized your neutrality” Desmond Tutu.


Sadly, South Sudan’s peace failed because, all regional and international bodies namely; the JMEC, IGAD-PLUS, AU and the UN who supposed to tell directly Mr. X, Y, Mrs. Z (Peace Violators) that you have violated the Agreement or you are wrong here or there had been just keeping quite.

They could not tell exactly who was obstructing the peace agreement in Juba. They all would just resort to an unnecessary impartial—obliging language of “We/ I condemn in the strongest term possible or urge all parties to refrain from this and that.

To me, that tragedy happening in South Sudan was beyond impartiality! Acting even-handed in a situation where the perpetrators in one way or another are slaughtering the innocent citizens can be considered as choosing the side of the oppressors.

What had happened in 2013 should not repeat itself yet again in front of the International Community and the UN. The leaders’ power to protect their citizens is no longer with them. If the leaders had political will to protect and save the South Sudan’s ordinary citizens’ lives, then they would have done that since, in 2013, in Wau and last week in Juba.
In conclusion, for the world to help correct the past mistakes, the IGAD regional bloc should urgently form neutral forces from the IGAD neutral member states and send them as Deterrent forces to separate the fight or protect Civilians.

The killings are now concentrating in Juba and escalating as well to other areas as it happened in 2013. African Civilians Defend Forces (ACDF) should have been in place earlier as ready deterrent force. These forces must be mix now with UNMISS forces to help protect the civilians that are being slaughtered by that sinking dying horse in Juba.

Because in today South Sudan’s situations; people are no longer talking of how many thousands of innocent civilians have been displaced into the bushes or died in the past hour (s) or so, rather people are now talking of how many have remain alive & sound waiting the death. Everybody is waiting for his her turn to arrive.

And more importantly, the world must be , therefore, informed that what is happening in South Sudan is not far from terrorism activities being executed by Boko Harram in Nigeria, Al Shabab in Somalia, IS in Syria..Etc. For that reason, the IGAD-PLUS, AU, EU, the UN and the whole of the International Community should immediately expedite a very quick multiple responses to mitigate the South Sudan second genocide, in making, otherwise South Sudan would be a country with less than half of its civil population.

The author is a concerned South Sudanese. He can be reached at

Bishop Rocco Taban: A temptation & disgrace, the Catholic Church should take administrative action

BY: Kon Joseph Leek, JUL/07/2016, SSN;

It was sometimes in May [2016] when a number of aggravated youth carried postcards in to Emmanuel Cathedral [Episcopal Church] demonstrating the allowance of Dr. Riek to pray there a week before. Again, last week [26th June], the presiding Monsignor Rocco Taban Mousa, the Catholic Apostolic Administrator for Malakal [having powers equivalent to that of a bishop] turned into less of what he really is by whimsically crossing beyond his territory by imaginatively rolling out of the priest’s attires.

The Monsignor might have been out of his senses that time that perhaps made him forgot where he was, he filled his heart with hatred and vomited out a quantity of poisons in the holy place!

This was what he said as sourced from Radio Tamazuj: “More than 100,000 people are in the bush being displaced by their own government. This is the country we have chosen, this is the country we have voted for its independence so that our country displaces us, our Country. We are ruled really by monkeys, we have to be very clear we are ruled by monkeys.

And the governor who was protecting people in Wau, who was loved by the people in Wau, General Elias Waya, was removed by the presidential decree and being displaced by a mad man. Do we love our country? Do we love this nation?” End of quote.

And so far the president of the republic did not say even a word. In Australia, three people were killed three days ago. The prime minister came out three times a day to make a statement because of three Australians!

“They are eating, and drinking and sleeping. Devils! These are devils! We are ruled by devils and we are sorry for them.

We don’t want to call fire on them because we will go against Christ, but they have to understand that they are devils and they are ruling us with evil powers. They are criminals. Praise be Jesus Christ”. Monsignor Rocco Taban Mousa on Sunday 26th, June at St. Joseph Church Juba.

This exaggerated hypothesis from the priest was acting as antidote to his illusive pain of the claim that it is the government killing the people, yes, the government carries some blame on how the 2013 war came in the first place but the national quagmire now is a shared responsibility for us all.

We have [Monsignor Rocco included] a shared responsibility of talking to ourselves to accept ourselves through peace and reconciliation not through hate speech that amounts to incitement and later aggravates more hatred that results into more deaths [whether we want it or not, we have to accept ourselves for our co-existence]

Hearing this, you get to wonder what is going on. What is the church turning to be? Many churches are supporting gay rights, some pastors are committing abominable things like adultery, killing, some raping, others stealing, the rest committing pedophilia and come to the church and begin shouting “praise be to the lord!”

Lord! Which Lord? Those are the category of Monsg. Taban [is possibly coming from] of whom I am requesting the Catholic Church to dismiss him or take some disciplinary actions against him such that he doesn’t disgrace the church next time.

The Catholic Church need to look for ways of dealing with such imperious, puerile psychopathic priests.

Impetuous Rocco’s demagogic posture and oratorical nature hit the most climax that sent many in to hysteria [invigorated women to ululate as if they were in a marriage ceremony] and others marched out of the church.

Whatever he said is good to him and his supporters but my problem of which I believe the Catholic Church also knows and accepts it as true, is that the choice of the podium is inappropriate, it couldn’t have been on the pulpit-sacred place! but somewhere outside the church.

The priest had succeeded in his own way by slurring the congregates away from what they came there for.

Well, it is undeniable fact that many of these priests are living embodiments of what they preach but for this Rocco guy it’s just too much and open, preaching wrong thing in the right place in the earshot of everyone!

We just came out of war, some pockets of fighting that are going on do not need to be refreshed with hate speeches and taunting. The stand of the church is love as a holy place where we are supposed to talk of cooperation and rehabilitation not incitement like Rev. Rocco Taban.

I have personally stopped going to the churches these days until further notice because my psychic tells me that one day war will break out of the church. What is going on is quiet mundane and no one cares.

It was in the Episcopal Church last time from some youth and it is now in the Catholic church from the church leader! Let’s wait the other denominations.

It makes one to ask himself that, “Are some church administrators being too assiduous to dismantle the stand of the church to the public?”

In short; the Catholic Church’s authority, to clear the snow on this Rocco guy whose behaviors suddenly dominated the media needs to be de-horned in order to know the reach of his horn when it comes to how the church performs its activities or duties.

This is another character that is a clear symbol of Catholic Church’s administrative stereotype [to the negative perception] if not addressed.

The writer is a commentator on contemporary
Issues, he is reachable on