Category: Politics

Gen. Cirillo: Juba deal ignored root causes of conflict, rewarded political elite

By: FRED OLUOCH, TheEastAfrican, MAR/13/2019, SSN;
The leader of the National Salvation Front (NAS), a group fighting government forces in Central and Western Equatoria in South Sudan, Gen Thomas Cirillo Swaka spoke to Fred Oluoch about his faction’s refusal to honor the peace deal.

Q: Why did you refuse to sign the Revitalized Peace Agreement despite having participated in the negotiations?

We went to the negotiations in good faith to find lasting solutions to the problems in our country. Unfortunately, the negotiations took an unprecedented turn, where the issues we brought up were either ignored or dismissed.

The mediators embarked on coercion to force the parties to sign an agreement that did not address the issues of the conflict and would not therefore bring just and sustainable peace in South Sudan.

The agreement became a document for rewarding political elites with positions in the government. The issues affecting the people of South Sudan were not addressed.

Q: What aspects of the agreement don’t you agree with?

There are several issues that we believe are the root causes of the conflict in South Sudan, which the R-ARCSS has failed to address.

It was not tailored to address governance such as federalism, number of states, composition of parliament in the interim period and accountability.

Q: Don’t you think the people of South Sudan are tired of peace talks and agreements that are never honored?

We in NAS believe that the peace agreement, as it stands today, has not addressed the root causes of the problems in South Sudan, and hence will not lead to sustainable peace.

We are committed to the struggle for the rights of our people, which we believe can best be achieved through a negotiated settlement rather than following the path of aggression and war that is being pursued by the Juba regime.

The people of South Sudan cannot be tired of peace negotiations, since it is the only way to achieve a sustainable peace.

Second, NAS has not opened any offensive. Instead, our military positions have been attacked by forces of the regime, who are also indiscriminately shelling villages and committing war crimes, causing thousands of people to flee to the bushes and to Congo. We are fighting in self-defense.

The regime in Juba should be held accountable for not only the breach of the cessation of hostilities agreement, but also for the atrocities being committed against civilians in the country.

Q: Why did you take up arms?

We took up arms to resist the oppressive system installed by the Juba regime. We are dealing with a regime that leaves no space for any exercise of democratic rights, a regime that kills, plunders and rapes the very people whom it is supposed to protect and deliver services to.

The Juba regime believes in violence and so taking up arms for self-defense was a last resort for the people to ensure their survival against this brutal regime.

The grievances in South Sudan are issues of governance, security, land-grabbing and ethnic hegemony, which NAS and the South Sudan National Democratic Alliance believe should be resolved in negotiations and not swept under the carpet if there is going to be any just and sustainable peace in the country.


Gen. Cirillo’s Biography:

  • 1980s: Trained at Sudan’s Elite Military College and earned the rank of a major.

  • 1991: Joined the SPLA after the Nassir Massacre that saw Dr Riek Machar split from the late John Garang.

  • 2005: Headed the Joint Integrated Units under the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.

  • February 2013: Became SPLA Deputy Chief of General Staff in charge of Training.

  • February 2017: Resigned from the post of Deputy Chief of General Staff for Logistics.

  • March 2017: Formed the National Salvation Alliance to fight against the government forces

  • September 2018: Distanced NAS from the peace process and declined to sign the Revitalized Peace Agreement.

Q: Why did it take you five years since the war began in 2013 to realize that you could not work with President Salva Kiir?

South Sudan became an independent country in July 2011, after two decades of war, but just two years into its independence it imploded.

The mismanagement of the country started from the outset, when the former freedom fighters turned into the oppressors of the people of South Sudan.

While I was hoping that the 2015 agreement would bring peace, stability and development, the Juba regime in July 2016 orchestrated fighting to destroy the agreement and the president embarked on issuing decrees that were in complete breach of the peace agreement.

Unfortunately, despite all the advice and warnings, the Juba regime did not change and so resistance became the last option for the people.

Q: Since you had been an ally of President Kiir for a long time, why do you think the people of South Sudan should trust you to do things differently?

President Salva Kiir and I were comrades in the war of liberation and not allies. He was our senior commander and we all contributed, to the best of our individual capacities, to liberate our people.

As liberators we were bound by the task to free our people from the bondage of subjugation and injustice.

President Kiir has now departed from the path of being a freedom fighter to becoming an overseer of the very type of injustice that we fought against.

What is ailing South Sudan is the departure from vision for a country where there is justice, equality and a government that functions on state institutions that are devoid of tribalism, corruption and kleptocracy.

Q: SPLA remains a conglomeration of militias. Did you try to initiate reforms when you were second in command?

I have always been keen on reforms and professionalism in the SPLA (now renamed SSPDF).

When I was the deputy chief of staff for training and research in the SPLA, we developed a strategic transformation program to transform the guerrilla revolutionary army into a national professional army that should adhere to the civilian democratic governance by the people. END

There’s no “Res nullius” land to be seized in South Sudan.

BY: Moses Nyara, South Sudan, MAR/04/2019, SSN;

Rights over land in South Sudan are never lost or abandoned so as to become res nullius (Latin: Means ‘nobody’s property’). The idea that  the land must belong to the government isn’t only a deliberate  plan to extinguish seisin (English: means legal possession especially of land) of the land in South Sudan but a threat to the existence of the South Sudan State.  

South Sudan isn’t a settled territory. The South Sudan Nation State didn’t result from a conquest. 

Land rights in South Sudan predates any nation State or government. There has never been acquisition of sovereignty over any land in South Sudan. Not by the French, the British or the Arabs.

Our ancestors fought viciously against such a vice. There is no one to whom we must swear fealty (means a feudal tenant’s sworn loyalty to a lord) or make homage.  

The utterance in Bahr al Ghazal region by the Dinka during the so-called dialogue meeting in Wau that the land must belong to the state is nothing but an attempt to introduce the English doctrine of tenure and must be resisted.

The lands of South Sudan belong to its people. Land ownership is held by hereditary right. Lands are the absolute properties of their owners and not subject to any rent, service, or acknowledgment to a superior.  

The utterance in Bahr al Ghazal has nothing to do with peace dialogue. There is a deliberate plan to extinguish seisin in South Sudan through introduction of the doctrine of tenure.

The doctrine of tenure originated in the system of social and political organization known as feudalism which is practiced in England.

At the heart of the doctrine of tenure is the theory that all land in England is held either mediately or immediately by the sovereign. Thus, no person has absolute ownership of their land. Rather it is held ultimately by grant from the crown.

On acquisition of sovereignty, the government becomes the absolute and beneficial owner of all land. When you buy land, be it from the government or from any person for that matter,  you don’t buy it once and for all. You pay your money for a grant of tenure.

The condition of the grant is that you must render services to the Crown in return for the grant of the land. The doctrine envisages an ongoing relationship between the crown and the tenant.

The application of the doctrine is South Sudan effectively means  that the government of the day will seize all the lands and render its citizens landless.

It’ll force the inhabitants of the land into a dependent land holding- the holding of land in return for rendering of services.

The land will become a source of many land relationships such as justice and policy. For example, such a policy would be paying of land tax or the requirements to develop your land in a particular manner.

If the tenant failed to fulfil her or his obligations to pay rates to develop the land, then the land is liable to forfeiture – the land is forcefully taken away from the citizen.

The effect of the doctrine is that the state is not just the sovereign of the citizens and territory with the realm, but it’s the absolute lord paramount over landholders and their land.

The  political party or president in power will be free to grant large tracts of land to any persons or persons who’d supported him in battle or elections.

The party and government of the day will be free to reward their supporters to ensure their continuing loyalty, thus raising corruption, large-scale resettlement of populations and even a new colonization of South Sudan.

Nothing will stop the government from driving away the inhabitants of a piece of land in South Sudan and giving that land to a Chinese or Arab developer if the people of the land are not able to develop it to the requisite standard the government has set.

There are plain examples of such acts. The Ethiopia’s government has been accused of forcing tens of thousands of people off their land in the Gambella region so it can be leased to foreign investors.

There’s  increased interest by foreign investors on African land and South Sudan is a prime target. Less because its leaders are corrupt but more so because its inhabitants are ignorant of the law.

The question is whether the people of South Sudan are prepared to cease sovereignty and allow the state to take jurisdiction over the lands of which their fathers and forefathers shaded blood in defense of it.

More importantly, whether the people consider the government of the day a government of the people by the people and for the people. A government worthy to be cede the right to?

The author, Mr. Moses Nyara  can be reached via: Disclaimer: the views are solely mine and do not represent any institution or government.

Pres. Kiir’s sneaky strategy to impede peace implementation

By Duop Chak Wuol, South Sudanese, MAR/02/2019, SSN;

Salva Kiir claims his government doesn’t have the necessary financial means to finance the implementation of the September 2018 peace agreement and demands that the international community finance the process so that peace will prevail.

It’s no secret that the rationality of investing money in the execution of the deal has many contending interpretations.

If Kleptocracy needs a new mother, then any coherent South Sudanese would argue that their government’s assertion of having no money for the enactment of peace is merely one of many Kleptocratic qualifications Juba’s regime needed to give birth to a new and more aggressive modern Kleptocracy.

This would be a Kleptocracy that impedes the execution of the pact, curbs reform, maintains tyranny, justifies looting of national coffers, and effectively transforms South Sudan into a thiefdom.

The people of South Sudan are tired of war and desperately need normalcy to return to their nation. I don’t believe that there’d be any reasonable South Sudanese who’d say he or she wants the conflict to continue because the suffering that has been inflicted on the people of South Sudan is irrefutably monumental.

However, the success of this peace is in the hands of the current Kleptocratic regime. This regime must fully embrace and implement this agreement if it’s serious about a lasting peace in the country.

There’re many issues that’re associated with the realization of the deal. But only the issues of an equal army, budget for peace implementation, a hybrid court, dissolution of powers, unification of the armies, and the Independent Boundaries Commission (IBC) will decide the fate of the agreement.

Salva Kiir is already exploiting these provisions to further delay the success of the deal. Kiir believes that by constantly complaining about the peace funding issue, postponing the unification of rebel and government forces, creating conditions to delay the dissolution of powers, objecting to the formation of a hybrid court, and preventing the IBC to independently perform its duties, he can at least prevent the treaty from being fully implemented.

He believes that by doing so, he can keep his grip on power. Kiir is certain that by creating these obstacles he can, by default, continue leading the country using the current tyrannical constitution.

His hope is that his delaying tactics will keep his brutality alive or lead to an eventual collapse of the agreement.

On the issue of budget, Kiir is determined to keep insisting that his government does not have the money needed for peace implementation.

This should be understood considering recent disgraceful revelations that his government influenced some members of the National Pre-Transitional Committee (NPTC) in December 2018 and January 2019 to approve at least $135,000 dollars and that the money was used to renovate politicians’ homes, including the home of his First Vice President, Taban Deng Gai.

Salva Kiir isn’t ashamed of his destructive leadership. He has also drawn up a plan to systematically resist the unification of the South Sudan People’s Defense Forces (SSPDF) and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army-In Opposition (SPLA-IO) forces including national security personnel.

This strategy is centered on the idea that the government will manufacture excuses that’d then force the Joint Defense Board (JDB) to conduct lengthy investigations in the hope of further delaying the unification process.

One of the techniques Kiir will use to prevent the two armies’ unification is to not agree to an equal number of troops. In his mind, he believes that he can offer the same number of soldiers SPLA-IO has and still maintain a private armed force.

Regarding the dissolution of powers, Salva Kiir is determined to prevent amending the constitution in a way that’d strip him from appointing and removing state and national officials through presidential decrees as it has been the case for the last five years.

The man is addicted to current tyrannical leadership powers. Kiir’s cunning strategy doesn’t stop here, as he’s also prepared to use his security forces to intimidate and harass the Independent Boundaries Commission (IBC) to prevent it from deciding the number of states.

He has also decided that he won’t agree with any idea that’d allow the formation of a hybrid court to try those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Kiir’s claim to have no money for peace implementation is scandalous, to say the least. To refresh your mind, this calculating plot began in June 2018 when representatives of South Sudanese and Sudanese governments met in Khartoum.

The meeting was the result of a secret plan by Juba to ask Khartoum to repair its oil fields that were damaged in the April 2012 Heglig war. In return, South Sudan’s government’d pay Sudan at least $1 billion dollars for losses and damages that Khartoum incurred during the Heglig war between Sudan and South Sudanese forces.

This is simply a cover story. The reality was that South Sudan’s government desperately needed money and the best way to keep getting enough cash was to deceive Sudan into believing that Juba was sorry for occupying Heglig in 2012 and that any damage South Sudan caused would be paid.

This was a classic deceptive technique designed to minimize any suspicion about the proposal. Juba was pleased after Khartoum agreed to repair its oil fields.

Salva Kiir’s sneaky strategy was well-planned. Logically, the man simply needed more money so that he’d keep buying weapons and ammunition to further defend his regime or eliminate his political rivals.

It’s worth mentioning South Sudan government claimed early last year that the South Sudanese peace process needed $20 million dollars. The government also maintained at that time that its rubber-stamp parliament approved the budget even though there was no evidence to verify such a seemingly public relation stunt.

In January 2019, Kiir surprised the people of South Sudan, saying that his government doesn’t have money for peace implementation and appealed to the international community to fund the process.

Kiir’s appeal was met with silence. Days after the announcement, his information minister Michael Makuey Lueth –a documented killer– lashed out at the European Union and Troika countries (the United Kingdom, Norway, and the United States) and accused them of working against peace in the country.

The accusation was a clear sign of desperation from a government that has a documented history of deceiving the international community—especially when it comes to the peace process.

Remember, the failed 2015 power-sharing deal was heavily funded by the Troika countries and South Sudanese all know what happened in July 2016.

South Sudan’s government doesn’t need money from the international community to finance the implementation of the agreement. The current oil output is enough to fund the deal.

But the Kleptocratic mentality Kiir and his allies developed for the last five years has transformed them into brave thieves. They see South Sudan’s oil as their property. They prefer another country paying for the peace process so that they can keep looting the nation’s natural resources.

This is the very reason why the international community has had enough of wasting their tax-payers’ money on his Kleptocratic and murderous regime.

Salva Kiir’s cunning behavior is sometimes contradictory. In early February, Kiir told his ruling Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) party (SPLM) parliamentary caucus officials that he doesn’t like Khartoum’s peace agreement and that he signed simply because he doesn’t want to see the people of South Sudan continue suffering.

During his speech, Kiir alleged that the United States refused to recognize the agreement. His accusation was centered on the idea that if the U.S. refused to finance peace implementation, then other Western countries would also not pay their money.

This allegation is a mere joke—in fact, it’s a shame for the country. Juba’s regime has proved itself to be an accuser of the West even when the blame is too naked to believe.

Western nations have nothing to do with the ongoing crisis in South Sudan. Kiir is the one who orchestrated the conflict in 2013 after it was clear to him that most members of the SPLM political bureau lost confidence in him.

Salva Kiir needs to understand that South Sudan is a sovereign nation today because of the West. The Republic of South Sudan is a product of United States foreign policy.

To accuse Western countries of working against peace just because they don’t want their money to be used to kill political opponents is reprehensible.

As you can see, Kiir’s behavior shows the man isn’t serious about peace. He seems to be interested in getting money from the international community as he did during the implementation of the failed 2015 pact.

It is now clear that Kiir’s plan to get money from the international community for peace implementation is not going to work as he thought it would. The regime has resorted to raising $285 million dollars by taxing civil servants.

What I find ironic about this rather frantic move is that most of the civil servants the government is claiming to tax are already struggling daily and Kiir knows it. His government has not been paying the salaries of most of these workers.

There are questions raised about why the implementation of the agreement would require such a questionable huge amount. Remember, the initial budget proclaimed by the government was $20 million dollars and it’s now $285 million dollars. Something is obviously devious here.

South Sudan is the world’s youngest nation, but this young country has abused its infancy by having corrupt leaders that exploit national resources to further advance their wealth and political powers.

These leaders, led by Pres. Kiir, only think of themselves and their families. They’ve no plan for the nation, let alone the much-needed reforms stipulated in the Khartoum’s peace deal.

Kiir has proven himself to be someone who knows how to deceive his rivals and then later disposes of them like unwanted towels. This is evident in the ongoing peace process.

The international community must not fund peace implementation because the government of South Sudan has proven itself to be a deceitful money-maker and killer at the same time.

When the August 2015 agreement was signed, President Salva Kiir listed conditions where he publicly criticized the international community, especially the Troika, saying the now-defunct power-sharing deal was imposed on him.

Kiir was not alone: the leader of the SPLM-IO, Dr. Riek Machar, also complained about the same issue. Despite these issues, the international community was united and funded the agreement.

But the peace was short-lived after Kiir, former army chief Paul Malong Awan, and the current First Vice President Taban Deng Gai conspired to kill Machar in Juba in July 2016.

The financiers of the pact were stunned but failed to openly denounce Kiir for using their taxpayers’ money and then dumping the agreement. This is exactly what Kiir wants to repeat by collecting donations from foreign nations to further his political madness.

Salva Kiir’s current tactics in this peace process have strong links with the delaying techniques he used in the 2015 peace process.

The man is a devious oppressor who’s extensive records of deceiving the international community and bribing foreign leaders. He isn’t ready to fully implement Khartoum’s peace agreement.

His main objective is to fool potential South Sudanese political leaders into believing that the agreement is real and then strike at the right time as he did in the past. Those who believe that Kiir is serious about peace this time are either government supporters or are uninformed.

Kiir is a renowned sneaky and destructive leader capable of smiling while slitting the throat of his fellow South Sudanese at the same time.

The South Sudanese must not allow him to mislead the international community through his sneaky diplomatic relations.

Salva Kiir — a master of deceit, destructive, cunning, thieving, and murderous man — must not be allowed to impede the implementation of the agreement.

Duop Chak Wuol is the Editor-in-Chief of the South Sudan News Agency ( He can be reached at Note: The views expressed in this article are his and should not be attributed to the South Sudan News Agency.

Call for Alternative People’s NADAFA Government in South Sudan based on Three Autonomous Regions

FROM: 1-The People’s Democratic Movement (PDM), The Workers Party of Upper Nile (WPU) and The Federal Democratic Party (FDP)/Army;

Concerned Citizens in South Sudan and in Diaspora: We, together take the opportunity to inform the general public and our constituencies in South Sudan; based in Equatoria, Upper Nile and Bahr al Ghazal, that we are announcing to you and the world community, AU, IGAD, UN and TROIKA countries; the establishment of the National Alliance for Democracy And Freedom Action (NADAFA) as a popular, grassroots peoples alliance for democracy and freedom action in South Sudan.

NADAFA calls for Three Autonomous governments representing peoples of three regions of Bhar El Ghazal, Upper Nile and Equatoria.

The alliance members; People’s Democratic Movement, the Workers Party of Upper Nile, and Federal Democratic Party/Army and others who will join them, are committed to and firmly believe in creating the foundation for genuine lasting peace, democracy and sustainable development through alternative Peoples NADAFA Government in Upper Nile, Equatoria, Bahr al Ghazal, and South Sudan that will be based on federation of three autonomous regions during a transitional period of a NADAFA’s TFGoNU[1] as the way forward.  

For that reason, the Alliance agreed to advocate for and shall promote:

  1. The Call for three Autonomous Regions during transitional government period, giving the people a chance to rebuild themselves in their own regions of Bahr El Ghazal, Equatoria and Upper Nile. The NADAFA Government will ensure that the rehabilitation of refugees and IDPs is carried out by putting the people first, and power-sharing equitably between the peoples, respect for the people and human rights shall come first in our country. The call for a Governance status of Upper Nile, Equatoria and Bahr al Ghazal as three autonomous regions with their borders and districts as they stood on 1st January 1956, in a new federal governance system during NADAFA Transitional Government period. New Peoples Social Contract and Constitution making for a people’s choice of governance system for their country between Federation or Confederation of states, including determination of number of states during the transitional period.
  2. Freedom action by the people using all legitimate means of struggle, including popular uprising for freedom in the event negotiation and peaceful means fail to amicably resolve the governance crisis under SPLM tribal rule in South Sudan.
  3. Positioning the alliance as the Peoples alternative NADAFA Government for our country to bring and realize enjoyment of Human and Peoples Rights, Economic, Social, Cultural and Political Rights by all our peoples in the three regions and 64 ethnic communities, and put an end to impunity and endemic corruption by hegemonic and tribal elites in South Sudan once and for all.
  4. Accountability for and recovery of all stolen monies in billions by the ruling elites from public coffers and resources, wasted in corrupt deals, personal enrichment at public expense, or in money laundry in real estate or property abroad.  
  5. Freedom of expression, and independent public broadcasting and democratic media sector that is not operating under state control, and which enjoy the right of access to information and the Public’s Right to Know.

NADAFA, the alliance shall seek to realize a political solution to the conflict in South Sudan predicated upon:

  1. All the peoples of South Sudan shall be guaranteed the right to live in a civil and democratic society which respects human and peoples rights in conformity with the ACHPR[2]
  2. The peoples of South Sudan shall have the right to determine the system and form of governance in the social contract and constitution making process, which may be a federation of three or more states or confederation of them.
  • Any forum for peace negotiations to reach an agreement shall ensure the socio-political and economic conditions that promote Three Autonomous Regions for a just and lasting peace for all the peoples of South Sudan are met, and guaranteed by the world community, and the protracted presence of UN peace keeping forces as may be adequate and necessary to keep the peace.
  • The world community are urged and welcome to contribute both relief and development resources to support the new and democratic societies and political forces establish a strong foundation for democracy and lasting peace in South Sudan based on Three Autonomous NADAFA Governments in Malakal, Juba and Wau.

The People’s Democratic Movement, the Workers Party of Upper Nile, and Federal Democratic Party (FDP)/Army take the opportunity once more to repeat their call to our people in Upper Nile, Equatoria and Bahr al Ghazal to forge a broad based socio-political struggle under the National Alliance for Democracy And Freedom Action (NADAFA) in our country, to end SPLM impunity, and lead democratic transformation that will usher in a just and sustainable peace.

NADAFA Alliance’s – Urgent recommendations to IGAD, AU, TROIKA and UNSC for a negotiated peace agreement in South Sudan:

  • Revisit R-ARCSS to open it up for a critical review to incorporate provisions for Pre-Transitional People’s conventions in Upper Nile, Equatoria and Bahr al Ghazal before start of Transitional Period and its possible extension thereof;
  •  Revisit and review R-ARCSS to incorporate provisions for a Federal governance system during the transitional period based on three autonomous regions of Upper Nile, Equatoria, and Bahr al Ghazal with their colonial districts and borders as they stood on 1st January 1956, which are well known and thus avoid the need for unnecessary imposition of the illegal 32 or 21 states in South Sudan;
  • Review R-ARCSS to incorporate provisions to address the root causes of conflict, justice and accountability for war crimes, and crimes against humanity and gross human rights violations in South Sudan;
  • Review R-ARCSS to limit undue influences, direct or indirect infringement upon the sovereignty and economic resources of South Sudan by foreign or IGAD sponsored regional powers, such as Sudan and Uganda in particular, and who are not to be authorized as peace Guarantors in South Sudan by the UNSC;
  • Review R-ARCSS to lift the state of emergency, release of all abducted political detainees and prisoners of war, accountability for missing abductees, Aggrey Ezbon Idri and Samuel Duong Luak who were kidnapped from Nairobi and both of whose fate still remain unknown;
  • Review of R–ARCSS to incorporate provisions for repatriation of Refugees and Internally Displaced People (IDPs) to their homes and places of origin in Equatoria, Upper Nile and Bahr al Ghazal;
  • Review of R-ARCSS to incorporate provisions for strategic security sector reforms, establishment of a national army and organized forces that will constituted from all the 64 ethnic groups in the country from Upper Nile, Equatoria and Bahr al Ghazal;
  • Review of R-ARCSS to incorporate provisions for all natural resources, gold mining and oil sector revenues transparency and accountability;
  • Review of R-ARCSS to incorporate provisions for funding implementation of a sustainable peace agreement in South Sudan from local and international partners,; UN, AU, IGAD, and TROIKA countries.

The alliance calls upon you the people of Equatoria, Upper Nile and Bahr al Ghazal to join NADAFA of your country and end this endemic impunity, misrule and corruption of SPLM.

SPLM impunity shall never again ruin the new born that is our country and nation the people voted for in 2011 self-determination through referendum, united by the Nile, and by the promise of a bright future.

We, the NADAFA Alliance call upon you to support the alternative People’s NADAFA Government vision for your country in the three Autonomous Governments based on regional representation in order to set the new direction for a genuine democratic transformation in South Sudan.

Why Alternative People’s NADAFA Government for South Sudan

It is clear to the people of South Sudan that SPLM destroyed our country and ruled with impunity. It is now clear that without going to Three Autonomous Regions, South Sudan will never see and experience peace under SPLM tribal rule.

Thabo Mbeki, the former South Africa’s President described the ruling SPLM in Juba as a bunch of kleptocratic  tribalists. The Trump administration further indicted President Salva Kiir’s leadership as being “morally bankrupt.”

The scathing Sentry reports of endemic corruption by SPLM leaders in power are no different. Since the summer of 2013, the SPLM has long ceased to be the leading democratic and progressive political organization in the country, not capable to lead democratic transformation after independence in 2011.

President Salva Kiir has literally installed himself as a full time dictator and earned condemnation of world leaders and friends of South Sudan liberation struggle alike; for the abject conditions of human rights abuses, corruption and impunity he created and permitted in the country. This is over and above gross human rights violations, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

SPLM is without legitimacy, fractured and failed on all counts, and is now without institutional foundations to retain the trust of the people to govern after its list of 75 leaders massive corruption in Government, which ultimately triggered and imposed a civil war in SPLM and equally in the country.

All this is occurring whilst the family of the President and relatives, with their children enjoyed owning expensive villas in Nairobi, shares in companies and a string of businesses of all trades, and looted public resources with impunity, such as Bol Mel’s infamous ABMC business model, together with other elites-owned firms in South Sudan that are sanctioned by the USA for money laundering.

President Kiir has turned the country’s resources into a personal bank account for corrupt ruling elites in SPLM and other political parties in his regime.

There is therefore absence and lack of any political will or capacity left in the ruling SPLM, and in this dictatorship and kleptocracy to be the ones entrusted with developing genuine democracy and sustainable peace in the country when credible democratic institutions are non-existent in all SPLM variants of the IG, FDs or IO kind.

The country is now faced with a huge deficit of democracy and foundation for sustainable peace and development that puts the people and respect for their dignity and basic human rights first.

The burden of democracy development lay not in the SPLM variants of corrupt-elites power sharing governments of the R-ARCSS anticipated type or the one before it that collapsed. That burden of democracy and sustainable peace development laid in a radical approach with a future ‘all peoples national alliance for democracy and freedom action’ alternative government, one that shares power equally between the peoples of Equatoria-Upper Nile-Bahr al Ghazal inclusively in all their diverse 64 ethnicities.

The way forward

The alternative is the Peoples NADAFA[3] Government[4] for the country, to disrupt dictatorship and most needed to clean the country from endemic corruption, end impunity and kleptocratic rule of SPLM and Salva Kiir, which destroyed the social fabric in South Sudan. The alternative People’s NADAFA government will mend and repair the social fabric, establish the new social contract and political order which South Sudan needs and that puts the people, their dignity and human rights first.

The alliance members; PDM, the Workers Party of Upper Nile, and FDP/A are committed to and firmly believe in creating the foundation of genuine democracy and sustainable peace development through alternative Peoples NADAFA Government in Upper Nile, Equatoria, Bahr al Ghazal, and South Sudan in a federation of three autonomous regions during a transitional period of a truly NADAFA TFGoNU[5] as the way forward.

Our Vision

Establish NADAFA’s Transitional Federal Government of National Unity in conjunction with Three Autonomous Regional Governments, which will be the primary basis for giving our people the right to choose Confederation or Federal system of government in the constitution making process.

Our Mission

The mission of NADAFA is to advocate for Democracy, Human and Peoples Rights, and rebuilding our regions to ensure and guarantee the rights of our peoples to live in a civil and democratic society which respects human and peoples rights and the full enjoyment of their economic, social, cultural and political rights, and providing accessible, affordable, and comprehensive education to our people across Three Autonomous Regions.

In order to fulfill our duty as responsible stewards of the people’s aspirations, we profess and commit to the values of Human and People Rights, integrity, responsibility and respect for human dignity as our guiding principles in all that we hope to achieve in service of the alliance and future NADAFA Government at large. 

The Peoples’ Alliance, NADAFA are calling on our sons and daughters in the ARMY, to join the call for freedom action to rescue our people and the country from the tribal tyranny of SPLM/A.

NADAFA appeals to and expects the highest standards of moral character and ethical behavior in the peoples struggle for freedom and justice. In particular, you in the institution of the (ARMY) have been used by politicians and corrupt generals for the past 5 years to protect their POSITIONS, Businesses and Financial networks.

Now, our people need your Honesty and Integrity to act in defense to rescue our people from tyranny of tribal elites. NADAFA, the people’s alliance looks with high expectations to fulfillment of your obligations as the people in Uniform, towards your oppressed people of South Sudan under SPLM tribal dictatorship and tyranny.


CC: H.E.Ambassador. Ismail Wais, IGAD Special Envoy to South Sudan

CC: President Salva Kiir Mayardit, Head of TGONU, SPLM-IG

CC: Hon. Angelo Beda, Co-Chair of The National Dialogue Committee

CC: Dr. Riek Machar Teny, Chairman and C-in-C, SPLM-IO

CC: Mr. Peter Gatdet Yak, Chairman, South Sudan Opposition Alliance SSOA

CC: Dr. Kwaje Lasu, South Sudan National Democratic Alliance SSNDA

CC: Mr. Deng Alor Kuol, Representative SPLM-FDs

CC: Mr. Peter Mayen, Other Political Parties, OPP

CC: H.E. Ambassador Lt. Gen. Augostino Njoroge, Interim Chairperson RJMEC,

CC: H.Es. Ambassador Chris Trott, Ambassador Erling Skjønsberg,,TROIKA

CC: H.E. Mr. Mousa Faki Mohamat, Chairperson of AU

CC: H.E. David Shearer, Head of UNMISS


Name Organization Signature
Dr. Hakim Dario Chairman People’s Democratic Movement     
Mr. Gatluke Reat Chairman Workers Party of Upper Nile  
Mr. Thomas Peter Chairman   Federal Democratic Party /Army          

[1] Transitional Federal Government of National Unity – TFGoNU

[2] African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights

[3] NADAFA abbreviation for National Alliance for Democracy And Freedom Action

[4] Transitional Federal Government of National Unity – TFGoNU

[5] Transitional Federal Government of National Unity – TFGoNU

‘Little chance of lasting peace in South Sudan,’ says US Defense Think Tank

By: KEVIN J KELLEY, From the EastAfrican, JAN/31/2019, SSN;

Prospects for lasting peace in South Sudan appear poor, an expert on the country suggests in an analysis for the US Defence Department’s Africa think tank.

Despite the warring parties’ agreement to end the country’s five-year civil war, the coming months carry a “likelihood of ongoing offensive operations, largely by the government,” writes Klem Ryan, a former co-ordinator of the United Nations Panel of Experts on South Sudan.

“This is particularly likely,” Mr Ryan adds, “if the Intergovernmental Authority on Development [Igad] sanctions on military operations continue to remain muted, signalling to the government of South Sudan that there is little political consequence for continued fighting.”

Igad has sought to help broker peace in South Sudan, but its efforts have proved ineffectual due in part to political divisions among its member-states.

Fighting has continued at a reduced level in parts of South Sudan since last September’s reaffirmation of a 2017 peace agreement, Mr Ryan says.

He notes that violence has been most intense in the states of Wau and the Equatorias, with government forces targeting areas considered to favour opposition groups.

“The fighting is linked to the control of land resources, but it also changes the demography of these areas,” Mr Ryan observes. “Reducing the presence of people expected to vote against the government is likely to be an additional aim of these offensives.”

Recent military offensives have apparently been conducted jointly by pro-government militias and opposition forces allied with rebel leader Riek Machar, the analyst says.

These operations, he adds, have been aimed at non-signatories to the peace agreement — specifically Thomas Cirillo’s National Salvation Front, which is active in Central and Western Equatoria.

An official merger of government and rebel troops, which the peace agreement envisions, probably will not occur, Mr Ryan speculates because of the inclusion of large numbers of Nuer. END

First Legal Case against Kiir’s Government for Gang Rape & Sexual Slavery Lodged.

DEC/06/2018, SSN;

The Legal Action Worldwide (LAW) has lodged the first case against the government of South Sudan led by President Salva Kiir for sexual violence against 30 South Sudanese women and girls by members of the South Sudan army, currently known as the South Sudan People’s Defense Forces (SSPDF) and formerly the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) and the Presidential Guards.

The complaint outlines brutal sexual violence, including sexual slavery, sexual torture, rape and gang rape against women and girls during attacks on their villages and whilst they fled the violence from June 2016 to September 2017.

The case has been lodged at the UN Committee on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in Geneva.

The 30 women and girls represented by LAW include ‘K2,’ who was subjected to mass rape with her three sisters and a family friend in front of each other in their kitchen. She was 12 years old at the time.

Muding, 42 years old, was gang raped by SPLA soldiers whilst another soldier blew a whistle indicating when the perpetrators should finish.

Joanna’s nine years old daughter was beaten outside while she was raped inside in her home.

Scovia, a 27-year-old mother of four, was gang raped by five Government soldiers. Whilst she was being gang raped, two of her children disappeared. She has not seen them since.

And Viola, 29 years old, who was tied to a tree, tortured and gang raped by Government soldiers in an army camp.

“The conflict in South Sudan has been ongoing for five years and during this time, tens of thousands of young girls and women have been subjected to horrific sexual violence by Government security forces.

To date almost no one has been held accountable. We have to ask ourselves: Why are we not doing more to protect them?” asked Antonia Mulvey, Executive Director of LAW.

“This is a landmark case which is the first step on a long road to justice for all women and girls in South Sudan.”

Rape has been used as weapon of war against the civilian population and until today, there has not been a case against the Government for its actions.

The women and girls that LAW represents are so frightened of reprisals from their Government and its agents that they have fled their own country and are now living as refugees.

Due to serious concerns for their safety, LAW has requested that the UN Committee protect their full identities during the consideration of their case.

About Legal Action Worldwide (LAW): LAW is a unique non-profit network and think tank of human rights lawyers who provide creative legal assistance to individuals and communities who have suffered human rights violations and abuses in fragile and conflict-affected areas.

LAW works in Africa, Middle East and South Asia and predominantly focuses on addressing sexual violence through legal intervention.

In Bangladesh, LAW co-represents 400 Rohingya women and girls in their victims’ submission before the ICC.


LAW will shortly begin an exciting new project that seeks to ensure the UN Security Council Women, Peace & Security Agenda, (UNSC Resolution 1325) is fully incorporated into South Sudan’s peace process and that women and girls, including survivors of conflict-related sexual violence, can effectively participate.

LAW and its consortium partners will empower South Sudanese women to engage with transitional justice mechanisms, and to reduce impunity for conflict-related sexual and gender based violence (SGBV). This will be done through a comprehensive approach.

On 19 May 2016, LAW held an expert panel on accountability for sexual gender based violence (SGBV) in South Sudan to launch the report along with the South Sudan Law Society and Amnesty International. Panellists included: David Deng, (South Sudan Law Society), Ferdinand Von Habsburg-Lothringen, (Committee for National Healing, Peace and Reconciliation), Elizabeth Deng, (Amnesty International) and Alicia Luedke, (Justice Africa). LAW’s Executive Director Antonia Mulvey moderated the panel discussion, which highlighted several ways forward for increasing accountability in South Sudan. 

National People’s Movement (NPM): Political Declaration of Another New South Sudanese Party

NOV/27/2018, SSN, Public statement;

The achievement of independence by South Sudan in 2011 was an important milestone in the country’s history. This proud win came about following a protracted struggle that lasted more than half a century, with brief interval of relative peace.

Millions of lives were lost and some of the citizens driven out to seek refuge in neighboring countries and beyond. Families were broken and most traditional communities lost their major means of livelihood such as livestock and agricultural production.

Another companion of war was the spread of trauma, a situation whose magnitude and extent has remained largely unrecognised, but is one of the country’s major social problems that has to be squarely addressed by both the national government and friends within the international community.


Following the attainment of the hard won independence, jubilation by the South Sudanese turned out a passing mood when members of the ruling elite within the party of the liberation, the SPLM, in their rivalry over power and its spoils, resorted to resolve their difference through violent means.

The country was driven a civil war before it could celebrate its third independence anniversary.
• The SPLM has been made to fail to transform from the liberation movement into a ruling party with a clear programs for governing the country, including laying down a foundation for democratic governance and the rule of law even within the party itself. Democracy within the party itself was being shunned, resulting in what can be termed as “democrophobia.”

• While some of the leaders constantly shouted at the rooftop that they were liberators, their actions told a different story: they abandoned nation-building and embarked on a brazenly parochial couldn’t desist from their past embedded hatred among themselves and remained suspicious of each other and operating in groups of loyalty mostly on tribal lines, which impacted the delivery and coordination of work to serve the people, instead, each
concentrated on self-gain rendering ineffective and dysfunctional governance.

• Rampant corruption, which has become an entrenched culture in South Sudan’s ruling elites with complete impunity.

• The SPLA has been turned into a militia with personal and tribal allegiances. Lack of military code of conduct whereby a national army is free of politics and against the law to be affiliated to any political groupings.

• Unwillingness to form stronger institutions to govern the country with separate powers and independence.

• Nation reduced to Stone Age conditions without services; no power, clean water, proper schools, roads and hospitals.

• Collapsed economy with increased poverty. Employees, including the army, spend months without being paid their wages.

• Unprincipled foreign policy with no clear direction nor vision.

• Causing unnecessary war leading to death of hundreds of thousands and massive displacement internally and externally. Division among our people has escalated to unprecedented levels due to sowing of hatred by the elite and exercising the policy of divide and rule.

• Insecurity by creating a state of terror, guns everywhere and rampant killings by what has become to be known as “unknown gunmen” has become the daily occurrence.

• The country on the verge of collapse of either disintegration or placed under UN trusteeship and both are unacceptable.

• Tribalism and nepotism has become dominant in all aspects of our lives including employment opportunities.

Incomplete freedom: The longstanding struggle that was waged by generation after generation was not only for the
geographical independence and freedom from the Sudan, but was also for better lives of our people economically, socially and culturally as well as being free.

The lives have become more miserable even worse than the time of with Sudan; with wide spread poverty, disease and insecurity.

Therefore, came the necessity for another peoples driven revolution in order to complete the freedom of our people from the current ailments mentioned above. A revolution for good governance and to change the livelihood of our people and put South Sudan first, regardless of tribe, region, race or gender which are essential ingredients of building a cohesive and stronger nation.

We call all peace loving people and patriots in our country to support this movement for accountability, justice and peace. To build a nation that is proud of itself and inclusive of all segments of all the citizens without any kind of discrimination.

Long live the struggle of the People of South Sudan; Yes, time has come.

Thank you, Signed: On behalf of the Executive:

Dr. Matur Gorjok Gak, Chairman,
National People’s Movement (NPM)
Former Chairman,
SPLM Chapter, NSW, Australia
Date: 24th, Nov 2018


The Dialectic of the South Sudanese State: NAS & the R-ARCIS 

BY: Moses Nyara, South Sudanese, NOV/19/2018, SSN;

There is a persistent question in every Sudanese and in particular a South Sudanese mind. Why is that the Sudan and South Sudan never seen any peace? Why is it that in spite of the many signed agreements the Community in this great Nation call the Sudan has subjected itself to wars for so many years?

The latest of the many of agreement to be signed and would most likely be dishonored is the Revitalized-Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCIS) The agreement was inked on the 12th September 2018 and celebrated the 31st October 2018.

The accord was mediated by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), with Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan and President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda facilitating the negotiations. Khartoum and Kampala duped the agreement the final solution to the South Sudan problems.

The agreement is to address the root causes of post-independence issues and political differences between the various political actors in the nascent Country. But the question is, has it and would it? That is the big dilemma in everybody’s mind.

During the negotiation and at the signing ceremony, like many agreements before it, the people of South Sudan watched the interlocutors on their television and social media platforms dancing jubilantly,  singing Kumbaya we have brought you peace.

Many commentators were quick to point out that the agreement was mainly to serve the interest of the dominant warring parties that is the incumbent government of Salva Kiir Mayardit and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement in opposition of Dr Riek Machar Teny Dhurgon. The South Sudan’s Opposition Alliance (SSOA), an umbrella of nine opposition entities also took part in the negotiation.

While six of the group were happy or pressured to sign the agreement as some would say. Three members of the group distanced itself from the coalition and rejected the signing of the final document of the revitalized peace agreement by its leader.

The opposition National Salvation Front (NAS) led by General Thomas Cirillo; the People’s Democratic Movement (PDM) of Hakin Dario and the SPLM- Former Political Detainees – FDs, rejected the final version of the peace agreement, citing unresolved outstanding issues in the peace document.

In a classic textbook counterinsurgency style, Maj. Gen. Julius Tabule, a one general in the National Salvation Front (NAS) movement was airlifted to Khartoum, declared new leaders of the NAS and made to initial the agreement. To add to the confusion, General Khalid Butrous a member of NAS’s high command also proclaimed himself the interim leader.

Within hours of this renegades’ announcements, Thomas Cirillo moved swiftly and dismissed these two military figures, a move designed to put him in full control of the forces following their suspicious activities.

In the time when there is a yearning for peace around the country, many in public and the international community were not able to comprehend the Thomas Cirillo’s resistance to peace.

In this opinion piece and the series to follow, I would like to attempt to analyses the arguments the NAS has put forward for rejecting the R-ARCISS.  My focus will be on whether R-ARCISS adequately addressed NAS grievances or not.

For a start, some understanding of the factors that drove the NAS rebellion is warranted. There is no rebellion without a cause(s).

This first opinion thus focuses on the post-independence political maneuvering that left the country in chaos and the NAS rational for its subversive activities. It only fits that one tries to understand why NAS took up arms.

While one is not a political scientist, one does have some reasonable comprehension of  South Sudan issues and some knowledge about what a political cause means.

So, what caused a well-respected Lt General to turn against his party and take up arms? Though attempt is made here to answer that question, I am afraid the answer is not a straight one.

Political theorists have pondered over the big question of what caused the world’s revolutions for years. While theorists, such as Theda Skocpol sees revolutions as a rapid transformation of a society’s class and structure.

Political scientist such as Jack Goldstone sees revolution as a state breakdown which only happens when a government becomes weak.

Sure, most Sudanese and South Sudanese, in particular, are used to rebellions in the Sudan. One would say, it is almost a badge of honor for a Sudanese to have to survive or lived through one or two revolution(s).

From Mahdi revivalism; Anya Nya independent struggles to New Sudan projects or the current SPLMism.  The Sudanese masses have endured it all. My maternal mother was born, lived and survived the Anya Nya rebellion only to die in the SPLA/SPM struggle.

My siblings and I are no exceptions. We lived and survived the SPLAM/SPLAM revolution. My children are surviving the current waves of rebellions.

The Sudan and South Sudan are not the only countries to have revolutions. Revolutions have occurred through human history and vary widely in terms of methods, duration and motivating ideologies. From my limited reading of the literature and knowledge on the causes of revolutions.

Historical, many of the world’s revolutions have ‘both structural and transient causes; structural causes are long-term and large-scale trends that undermine existing social institutions and relationships and transient causes are contingent events, or actions by particular individuals or groups, that reveal the impact of longer-term trends and often (Jack A. Goldstone, p10).’

The author proposes to apply that definition in analyzing  the causes of NAS rebellion, which, it is argued, are:

— (1) demand for change, which is derived from (a) provocations and (b) solidified public opinion; — (2) hopefulness of success, which comes from (a) programs of reform and (b) leadership; and  —– (3) the weakness of the SPLM as a party which has been caused by disputes amongst itself; disaffection in the SPLA and international complications.

Theda Skocpol theorizes that political crises are often the trigger points for launching revolutions. One would agree that many trigger points lead to the current circle of rebellions in South Sudan.

I shall restrict this to the political triggers or what may be termed a crisis within the SPLM and now defunct SPLA.

There may be points of contentions regarding when and how the crisis started. Nevertheless, one would still reasonably accept that it is a political crisis which had its genesis in 1990s splits in the SPLM/SPLA.

In particular, when Dr Lam Akol and Riek Machar questioned Dr John Garang’s leadership in that infamous ‘Why Garang Must Go Now’ declaration or what they profess to be a rejection of Dr Garang’s ‘dictatorial leadership”.

Dr Lam Akol and Dr Riek Machar’s promised for human rights and an independent South Sudan lead to years of meaningless rebellions and counter rebellions leading to the period of chaos that reigned within the SPLA/SPLM.

Equally a crisis worth mentioning was the failed SPLA attacks on Juba in June–July 1992. The harsh National Islamic Front’s reprisals that followed lead to summary executions of suspected SPLA collaborators who were mainly intellectuals from the Equatoria region.

They include, from the army, Major Joseph Ladu, Major Andrew and over 60 soldiers of other ranks; from the police, Colonel David Kenyi, Lieutenant Colonel Lado Peter and Captain Arkangelo Yugu; from the prisons service, Major Pitia Kenyi, Captain Kamillo Koma, Captain Mohamed Khamis, and First Lieutenant Mark Taban. The torture or killings of these intellectuals created a gap and wound in the heart of many Equatorians.

One would also be justified in saying that the post-independence circle of rebellions in the country began in December 2013, when President Kiir charged his once Deputy Riek Machar and ten other historical members of the SPLM of attempting a coup d’état.

There is no argument in concluding that the fighting that broke out between the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) and SPLM-IO was the trigger for the South Sudan civil war. It was something to be expected. I say this due to the following reasons.

While many see the crisis as a struggle for power and wealth, I see it as the dialects of the South Sudan Nation. The contradictory process of nation-building among the nation’s idealist. A class of beliefs about the proper ordering of the South Sudanese society.

During the struggle for South Sudan independence, the various members of the SPLA/SPLM were each driven by different ideologies and motives. What united them all was the dream of an independent South Sudanese country.

Whatever ideologies and motivations the leaders had at the time, the masses were oblivious.  The yearning was for an independent South Sudan republic by any means necessary.

To properly contextualize this, it is necessary to understand the drivers of ideological opinions.

Since the time of the French Revolution, ideological opinions have been classified most often in terms of a single left-right dimension, which originally referred to the seating arrangements in the French parliament after the Revolution (1789–1799).

On a left-right spectrum, communism and socialism are usually regarded internationally as being on the left, whereas conservatism and capitalism are on the right. This formulation of the left-right distinction and many others contain two interrelated aspects, namely (a) advocating versus resisting social change (as opposed to tradition), and (b) rejecting versus accepting inequality ( Jost et al. 2003b,c).

In the Sudanese context, this translates to those who were advocating for outright independence of South Sudan and those who whose primary objective was a secular New Sudan. Under the separatists’ umbrella, many of the leaders harbor their ideological leanings.

There were those who adhered to the communist or socialist cred; others who preferred tribal fascism and there were many others whose reasoned ideals centered on liberal democracy. Some were simply Jesus Christ foot soldiers for whom  Nimeiry’s Sharia was an Arab man’s middle finger aimed at their bottoms.

While it is reasonable for one to hold  the view that the majority of the SPLM members were on the separatist spectrum from the revolutionary standpoint, when it came to the school of political reasoning, many preferred to flow with the eternal leaders.

A minority of them just swim with the tides, a cleverly designed art of political survival and resilience at almost any price. It is no surprise that the surviving founding members of the SPLM were those members that only washed one half of their face at a time and slept with one eye open like a meerkat or mongoose.

The dominating eternal leaders from the South Sudan leadership standpoint were Dr Garang and Dr Riek Machar. While their contempt for Al-Turabi’s muslimization and Arabization was the unifying cause.

Dr Machar disagreed with Dr Garang over the revolutionary objectives. Garang philosophy was ‘Sudanism. Garang believed, for the people of Sudan to live in cohesion, they must not separate themselves into the many existing ethnic factions present within the nation but, rather, to collectively renounce the belief that Arabness, Black African-ness, Islam or Christianity were to be the ultimate defining characteristics of Sudan.’

This was  the guiding philosophy of the SPLAM/SPLA under Garang’s leadership. The aim was to achieve a  secular and multi-ethnic New Sudan.

That was rather a different philosophy to that of Dr Riek Machar. Machar wanted a fully independent South Sudan. Although both agreed on the methods that was required to achieve victory over the Islamic fundamentalist, the two were not in tango with one another when it came to administration of the rebellion.

Dr Machar was pushing for more democratic leadership; accountability and internal reform. For Dr Garang  everything was to be run in the ‘Political Military High Command.’ Things were to be run the Soviet style.

It was inevitable that when the independence objective was achieved in 2012, the political ideologies and opinions within the SPLM would again become more divided and more centered to their identities.

According to social psychologist, there are relational motives, epistemic motives, and existential motives which helps to explain why certain people—once they are exposed to certain political ideas—stick with those ideas.

The  reality is that with the independence, it was inevitable that, the idealist within the SPLM would again meet other idealists who were dormant or were on the opposing side during the war, and the struggle for power would resume in the form of the present South Sudanese rebellions or civil wars where both tried to maintain and assert their status as the legitimate rulers of South Sudan.

The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) made this all possible. During the CPA negotiation, the National Congress party had the advantage over their Southern or SPLM counterparts, owing to its many years of experience in governing the Sudan.

The NCP had mastered a political strategy for dealing with other political parties in the Sudan. Oblivious to Dr Garang and his boys. The NCP had cleverly shifted the War from military boots on the ground to “war by other means.”

The conventional war was proving an expensive exercise, so the regime’s favored course of action was for dealing with rebellions was ” counterinsurgency on the cheap, co-opting opponents and internal subversion, propaganda and dirty tricks operations.”

The NCP has worked out that at the end, negotiations are cheaper than jihad. The regime was to hedge its bets on South Sudan.

The regime knew it was not powerful enough to enforce its will on all of Sudan’s factions at one time but is strong enough to hold onto political and economic power at the center. With John W Bush’s access of evil line running through the NCP corridor.

The NCP strategist knew negotiations was the only means of holding onto power, to level the playing field against the stronger opponents, and to co-opt and disarm them.  It was at the risk of the South succeeding from the rest of the Sudan.

To overcome the possibility and the reality of losing South Sudan’s vast resources, the NCP pulled out the last trick out of its political playbook. Let the South succeeded if it needs to be. If circumstances change, the regime can always renegotiate with the new South Sudan Republic based on new realities.

To achieve this, the NCP strategist weaved a clever political trap into the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), which was designed to infiltrate the SPLM and eliminate the separatist or nationalist base and replace them with people whose allegiance were with the NCP during the Civil War or people who are only there for the dime. The NCP is to permeate all sectors of the economy in South Sudan and all levels of the state apparatus.

The program was set, in that, the SPLM party and government was to observe all of the NCP political and military machinery that was in the South, by this, the author means the southern members of the NCP, the National Intelligence and Security Service (NISS) Southern agents and the NCP next work of counterinsurgency militia.

The counterinsurgency security and political set up that was designed during the War to fight and oppose the South separatist agenda was to be observed into the new South Sudan Government and institutions.

The NCP Junubin members; intelligent agents; Judges and funded militias were to be either integrated into the Southern government, the SPLM party or the SPLA during the interim period.

Having been trained by the NCP, these Junubins were very experienced in politics, negotiation, and deception and better prepared than any other political entity in South Sudan. They are to bring about the change in circumstances in the post-independent South Sudan.

On the other hand, the poor South Kordofanians and Blue Nile SPLM and SPLA members were to be left to fend for themselves. There was to be no truth and reconciliation commission to provide proof against the Junubins who were doing the dirty work for the National Congress Party (NCP) during the 21 years of civil wars.

Instead, they were to be observed and to continue to run the Southern Sudan security, judicial, and other state institutions. It was a broad parasitism strategy designed for realigning and manipulating the political leadership in South Sudan with the aim of returning Southern Sudan under North Sudan’s sphere of influence.

It is no surprise that with the birth of the independent Republic of South Sudan, the alt-racial National Congress Party (NCP) trained political and military strategists within the South Sudan institutions; security sector and political parties took out the NCP’s playbook and were able to apply it with ease.

They begin to evict all the host pro-genies from their nests methodically. Like a common cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) chick they rolled out most of the original SPLM leaders and cadets out of the nest and replaced them with their own or those who subscribed to the new project.

The ones that survived are those who read Mao Zedong “On Guerrilla Warfare” and  understood Mao, when he said, we must not belittle the saying in the book of Sun Wu Tzu, the great military expert of ancient China, ‘Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a thousand battles without disaster.’

While the National Congress Party (NCP) agents and original SPLM vie for influence, the mercurial President just waffles between these two power centers, while consolidating his power and remaining entirely in control of the two elements.

It was all facilitated or was made possible with the money coming from the friends of the West, as well as, the booming oil economy of the New Republic.

With the new regime awash with money. The National Congress Party (NCP) trained tacticians were at ease in executing the NCP manuscript.

Like their North Counterparts, these Jububins are brutal pragmatists, well-educated but toxic cosmopolitans, ready to negotiate, to deal, to compromise to tighten their grip on the real levers of power in South Sudan.

Their strategy is a constant state of negotiation with friends and foes alike. Bribe, loot, build clientalistic networks along tribal lines and break agreements, if circumstances change, you can subsequently broker a better deal.

Be prepared to escalate into mass murder and outright defiance if it calls for, the unknown man is to be allowed to swim in the turbid South Sudan waters when required.

In this internecine struggle between institutions and individuals, the friendship and support of the IGAD countries and especially Uganda and Kenya are a commodity like no other.

The birth of the holy grail of South Sudanese politics, a deliverable that Dr Riek Machar failed to deliver in the heady days of his ascendancy as the Vice President of the Government of Southern Sudan and SPLM Co-Chair of the Joint Executive Political Committee.

It has been this struggle for dominance which allowed militant rebellions to thrive in South Sudan and the cause for the immense suffering in the country.

With the continued struggle for power and the political chaos that has engulfed the Country, the National Salvation Front (NAS)  has followed the rebellion manuscript and posited itself as the alternate savior of South Sudanese.

The question the movement has asked itself is, how can the descent into abyss be stopped; using what means; what the possible options are and what should be the outcome of such an undertaking.

The movement has offered ten facts which it believes signify gross mismanagement of the affairs of the people of the Republic of South Sudan.

The facts NAS list includes:  (i) General security (ii) Food insecurity (ii) economic stagnation (iii)  security sector discord (iv) corruption (v) absence of basic services (vi) personalized constitution (viii) Tribal Loyalty ( ix) Human rights abuses.

In a series of opinions to come, I want to look at each issue. In particular, whether the signed Peace agreement addresses the issues NAS has raised, or whether NAS Cirillo is justified in its continuation of the war.

The author, Mr. Moses Nyara  can be reached via: Disclaimer: the views are solely mine and do not represent any institution or government.


The revitalized ARCISS … What next after the peace celebration in Juba?

BY: Dr. Peter Adwok Nyaba, Professor, politician, minister and opposition member, OCT/29/2018, SSN,;

This is a pertinent question to the South Sudanese leaders both in the government and in opposition as well as to those standing on the side lines. I take this question from what Prof. Jok Madut said on his Facebook page on 27 October, 2018.

It was about celebrating the revitalized peace agreement before the parties started the actual implementation. His concern that “celebrating now is to isolate the leadership from the people, to show that leaders only think of appeasing each other and nothing else.” I would wish that they only appeased each other but left the people in peace and in one piece.

I am puzzled more when different at cross purpose messages emanate from Juba. The government is saying one thing but the zealots in the SPLM are saying something different in the peace rallies they are conducting in the suburbs of Juba in the name of what they categorize as ‘sensitizing the people about the R-ARCISS.’

I would prefer to call it conscientization than sensitization. However, this is besides the message I wanted to deliver.

We are in the second month of the pre-transitional period to prepare the country for the transitional period, which begins in earnest on 12 April 2019. During this time, the parties should put in place the institutions and instruments of governance during the three-year transitional period.

The celebration of the revitalized agreement takes place while violations to the provisions are taking place that raised suspicion and reluctance by some leaders of the opposition to go to Juba.

Mind you, President Bashir will have to assure the safety of Dr. Riek Machar and other opposition leaders in Khartoum who will accompany him to Juba.

I believe the pre-transitional period is time to build trust and confidence between the South Sudan political leaders bitter contesting of the country’s leadership. The celebration in Juba should be the start of serious national dialogue among the political leaders since they have already agreed on how to share power.

By national dialogue I don’t mean negotiations; rather I am talking about a political discourse to have a scientific and correct understanding of the fundamental problem of the people of South Sudan.

I come from the political school or thought which attributes the social, economic and political crises afflicting South Sudan and its people in their social formations is NOT power but poverty and ignorance consequent to their socioeconomic and cultural underdevelopment.

All other contradictions like ethnic nationalism, corruption, insecurity, conflicts are secondary or offshoots of poverty and ignorance.

No doubt, had the South Sudan political leadership known this fundamental truth they would not have unleashed the civil war. It is therefore important that the leaders take time to study the situation and understand it well.

I would call on President Salva Kiir Mayardit to take the initiative commensurate with his statement that he has forgiven all and sunder including those who have been writing about him and his government.

He is the president of the country and therefore has all the power and authority to call the leaders of the opposition, including those who rejected the revitalized agreement, to a meeting to workshop and problematize the fundamental problem of South Sudan.

The objective of such a meeting would be to come up with a political program or plan in the social, economic and political domains, which the revitalized transitional government of national unity (R-TGONU) would implement during the three-year transition period.

The R-TGONU should really be an expression of unity of purpose translating into reality our people’s desire and yearning for peace.

It should really be a genuine and a patriotic effort to put South Sudan back on its feet in the manner we struggled for liberation and its independence. South Sudan cannot afford again to waste away and remain the sick man of Africa.

We have seen in the countries of the region, to which many of our people are refugees, that leaders are working hard to compensate for lost time and development opportunities.

Therefore, President Kiir’s reasons for convening this leadership workshop is to prepare a transitional government that will deliver on something he and other leaders have agreed on.

This means that the R-TGONU he will commission on 12 April 2019 will be a government with a plan of action and this will determine those who will be appointed to serve in those portfolios. It can’t be any other way.

The leaders of the opposition have a duty and responsibility to ensure the successful implementation of the R-ARCISS. Therefore, the question, what next? is addressed equally to the opposition leaders.

To appreciate its depth significance requires a change of attitude and a shift in political thinking. We can’t force President Kiir to change his attitude without a corresponding transformation on the other side.

The destruction that has afflicted the nation is a shared responsibility particularly for many of us who were in the SPLM/A and its splinter variants.

In conclusion, South Sudan is bigger than any individual, group of individuals or any single ethnicity.

For those who strive for power, let us think critically and strategically how power could be used to serve the people than personal or ethnic ambition.

Losing or not being in a position of authority is not in itself a limit situation. The most critical factors in the struggle for power and leadership are civility, ideology or knowledge and organization. END

The author is a prominent South Sudanese academic and politician.

The Consequences of Failing to Implement R_ARCSS

BY: Dominic Ukelo, South Sudan, OCT/27/2018, SSN;

Until recently, International Community focused its attention on the negotiation of peace agreements to resolve conflicts in the Republic of South Sudan and paid little attention to effective implementation process.

Unfortunately, during the last decades it has been proven that insufficiency in implementation of agreements has led to a serious consequences of failure to achieve a sustainable peace in the country.

The notion that a contract or an agreement between state and armed opposition parties would remain binding in the post-agreement phase, has been dishonest.

The reality revealed that, in the 1980s and 1990s, a just negotiated agreements in such countries as Angola, Cambodia, and Liberia collapsed and resulted in new deadly violence.

In fact, in some cases more blood was shed after failure to implement a peace accord than before the peace negotiations began.

Suspicions of implementation of any agreement in the Republic of South Sudan has been shadowed constantly.

Some of the factors that led to this shadow of failing to implement peace agreements in the country are lack of political will or seriousness to implement an agreement, security dilemmas of the warring parties, inadequate international involvement, the presence of spoilers whose commitment to peace is only tactical, vague, incomplete, or expedient peace agreements, and the lack of coordination among implementing agencies.

Such elements are merely a first step to understanding the problem of implementation in the country.

As of yet there has not been systematic, rigorous empirical examination of these factors.

And even if such explanations offer general insight into the problems of implementation, there is a need to develop policy-relevant strategies to overcome the reasons for failure to implement any peace agreement.

However, after the succesful implementation of Comprehensive Peace Agreement CPA in 9th January 2005, the government under leadership of President Salva Kiir Myardit, has been blamed for falling short of implementing any agreements between the state and the opposition parties.

Even when a settlement is negotiated and agreed as of ARCSS in 17 August 2015, a simplistic and a short term view of how to implement an agreement has undermined success of the agreement in the Republic of South Sudan.

The government of the country under leadership of president Salva Kiir Myardit, continuously assuming incorrectly that the government can achieve peace and therefore stabilize the economy, after outright military victory.

Unfortunately, the government could not discover in conflict after another that, even if it succeeded, winning the war militarily would bring a sustainable peace in the Republic of South Sudan.

Only peaceful resolution and effective implementation of an agreement remains a fundamental aspect of resolving any conflict in the Republic of South Sudan.

Moreover, critical factors of successful peace implementation in the Republic of South Sudan are demobilisation, disarmament of civilians armed by the Juba regime, and restructure of armed forces to be a national army.

The absence of these factors allows for a continuation of conflict.

Dominic Ukelo
26 October 2018