Category: Politics

Tackling insecurity of paramount importance to avoid disunity in South Sudan

By Jacob K. Lupai, RSS, DEC/10/2012, SSN;

South Sudan fought two bitter wars (1955 to 1972 and 1983 to 2005) against what was perceived as gross marginalization by successive governments of the old Sudan which perpetrated insecurity as a strategic mechanism to cow and silence people. In major southern cities such as Juba, Malakal and Wau people lived in constant fear for their security during the two bitter wars. Finally, as though the southern ancestral spirits had heard more than enough of the lamentation of the people, South Sudan achieved what it had set itself to achieve, total independence.

With independence expectation was very high for better security to people than under the successive discriminatory and oppressive governments of the old Sudan. South Sudan had lost many precious lives during the struggle for independence. Nonetheless, it was understandable that the precious lives lost were a price to pay for freedom. As people had suffered so much independence was seen as the ultimate solution to the long suffering. Insecurity in particular was to be seen a thing of the past as it was associated with the brutality of the successive northern dominated governments of the old Sudan when people in South Sudan were massacred, for example, in Juba and Wau and also in villages with impunity.

Security situation in Juba
When South Sudan attained independence Juba became the capital though the government now has the prerogative of relocating the capital. As the capital and the seat of the national government, Juba was expected to be provided with adequate security for its residents. However, insecurity in Juba has become so rampant that life is becoming almost unbearable. Regrettably more often people in uniform are accused of insecurity in Juba. Night robberies and killings are blamed on the people in uniform who carry guns and terrorize neighborhoods where innocent lives are unnecessarily lost.

Due to rampant insecurity people in Juba are wondering what is precisely going on. Some are even questioning whether it was right to vote for independence in the referendum in 2011. This is because on the ground insecurity is so frightening that people are panicking and preoccupied with the fear of the unknown for their lives. One citizen full of fear said it is God that is protecting people in Juba. The faith in government to provide the needed security to people seems to be waning. The implication is that the government is not sufficiently doing enough to curb the rampant insecurity in Juba. This is a challenge to the government.

One high profile case of rampant insecurity in Juba is the murder in cold blood of a prolific writer and commentator well known to readers as Isaiah Abraham. According to his biography the late Isaiah Abraham was a soldier with the rank of a major in the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) and had fought battles for the independence of South Sudan. At the time of his death Isaiah Abraham was the Director of Finance and Administration in The Employees Justice Chamber, a senior government position. For such a high profile individual and a senior government official to be murdered in cold blood with impunity, how secure would the ordinary folks feel? There is an assumption that Isaiah Abraham lost his life because of his critical views.

Arguably, the government couldn’t have officially ordered the execution of Isaiah Abraham Mafia style. Most probably Isaiah’s critical views were a threat to those who were not secure, lacking in confidence. A system that does not tolerate and weather storms of criticism may become very unpopular, losing a vital support where it needs most. No one is divine and so mistakes in a system and outside the system will always be made. The one criticizing is not divine and the other one being criticized is not divine either. Why then murder somebody for criticism if all are not divine in the first place but are only human? Something somewhere may not be right. This brings us to what is known as post traumatic stress disorder.

Effect of post traumatic stress disorder
Mr. Nhial Bol, a brilliant commentator and the Editor-in-Chief of the Citizen Newspaper in his column in one of the paper’s editions, was the first to talk about South Sudanese being traumatized. In addressing the launching of a conference on agriculture and food security at Nyakuron Culture Centre in Juba, the President of Republic of South Sudan, Salva Kiir Mayardit, also told the conference that the population including leaders is traumatized by decades of war and are in need of counsel ling in order to progress (Sudan Tribune, November 28, 2012).

According to the United Nations Mission in South Sudan government soldiers committed murder, torture and rape in the largest and troubled South Sudanese State of Jonglei (Sudan Tribune, August 24, 2012). Could this have been caused by people traumatized? Hopefully this may be a problem identified which is a problem half solved.

To begin with let’s look at what trauma is. According to a dictionary trauma is emotional shock. Let’s then look at what is post traumatic stress disorder with the acronym of PTSD. PTSD is an anxiety disorder that can occur after a person has experience a traumatic event such as combat or military experience, sexual or physical abuse or assault or a serious accident. It is an anxiety disorder in which an individual’s ability to function is impaired by emotional responses to memories of a traumatic event. PTSD often leaves one feeling vulnerable, out of control and as if one is in constant danger. These feelings are persistent, are strong and do not disappear over time on their own. Everyday life, work and relationship can be negatively affected.

From the definition of PTSD it can be deduced that an explanation is offered of the poor relationship between people in uniform and the civilian population in Juba and indeed in South Sudan. This may also explain the night robberies and land grabbing by suspected men in uniform. However, some people develop PTSD in response to traumatic events while others do not. This brings us to consider insecurity as the product of organized crime or crime committed by those who do not develop PTSD. Organise crime should therefore be a focus of enquiry to establish the extent to which it is the cause of insecurity in Juba and other towns, and also to establish who are the perpetrators.

Organised crime in relation to security
Organised crime can be a serious security problem. Independence to South Sudan has made it a home to the various nationalities in Africa. Citizens of the neighbouring countries are in South Sudan seeking greener pastures. Included may be hardened criminals who can go to any length to kill and rob people of their valuables. The problem is compounded with the help of local accomplices. With the greed for quick and big money in the shortest possible time, it is not difficult to understand why and how organised crime may exacerbate insecurity.

Organised crime is an enormous challenge to security and intelligence agencies. It is a test of the resolve of the agencies. The suggestion that there may be organized crime should be of interest. It is the work of the security and intelligence agencies to develop and test theories of why and how crimes are on the rise, for example, in Juba. This is to create lines of enquiry for evidence of organized crime and how to combat it. The public also have a role to play in combating organised crime.

Tackling insecurity in Juba paramount
On the untimely death of Isaiah Abraham murdered in cold blood by what appeared to be the work of professional contract killers, the President of Republic has ordered a thorough investigation to uncover the deadly criminals to face justice for their heinous crime. This is encouraging and should be the precedent for any heinous crime committed in Juba and in South Sudan in general.

Any life of South Sudanese is precious and, security and intelligence agencies should be well prepared to investigate crimes to the logical end. A criminal investigation should not be allowed to stop short of the final outcome of such an investigation and PTSD should not be used as an excuse to absolve criminals. It should be left to doctors (psychiatrists and psychologists) to determine that somebody has clinically developed PTSD. Even so the traumatized should be accountable for their actions or be detained in a mental hospital so that they are neither a danger to the public nor to themselves.

Quite often a criminal investigation is hardly completed and when the suspect is under arrest he or she may be released to the street the following day probably without charge. Law enforcement agencies need to have trained personnel who have investigating skills and also understand the law. South Sudanese who had served in the North may be well versed in investigation of crimes and the law. It is important that the experience, knowledge and skills of such people should be tapped to benefit the public in South Sudan. The negative attitude of looking at people who had served in the North as Jallaba agents should be a thing of the past. South Sudan is now an independent country and so people should move forward with confidence in each other to solidify unity for national cohesion.

Tackling insecurity in Juba needs every effort of law abiding citizens. It is natural that among people in uniform there are criminals as there are also criminals in plain clothes. No one therefore should be seen as above the law. It should not only be the manner in which Isaiah Abraham died to prompt a thorough criminal investigation. Any murder of a citizen or a crime committed should equally be thoroughly investigated and the culprit must face the law. Preemptive action is also needed to tackle insecurity. This is how insecurity can be tackled successively in Juba and indeed in South Sudan in general.

Conclusion
Tackling insecurity in Juba in particular and in South Sudan in general is of paramount importance to avoid disunity which may ultimately lead to the disintegration of South Sudan. Corruption and tribalism or nepotism are already a worry and to add insecurity as another big worry will be too much and unwanted burden in sustaining national unity and cohesion. It is now recognized that what is negatively going on in South Sudan may be because people are traumatized. There is already a suggestion that traumatized people need counseling. This is an appropriate suggestion and should be pursued further.

Counseling facilities should be made available for the traumatised to get help. Such facilities should have expert counselors to handle cases of trauma. Special focus should be on the people in uniform who might have borne the brand of the two wars of liberation leading to the independence of South Sudan. The people in uniform could have been the most traumatised.

In combating insecurity there is a need to streamline security and intelligence agencies. It is possible that some of the agencies may have inexperienced personnel who are below standard and are partly the cause of the problem. In Juba it is evident that some security and intelligence agents are out to harass and intimidate people instead of being helpful as ears and eyes to detect dangerous elements and situations that may be detrimental to national interest and security.

For example, in opening the Juba City Council new block of offices, the City Mayor complained openly of the interference with his workers by the security and national intelligence agents. The agents often arrested the City Council workers for unknown reason thereby affecting the workers’ performance in their daily routine. How were the workers a threat or a danger to national security that they had to be arrested is an open question. If there was something serious the workers were committing shouldn’t that have been brought to the attention of the Mayor?

Another incident was the detention and beating up of journalists by the police who were themselves detained for further questioning, obviously for the crude and primitive way of manhandling the journalists (Sudan Tribune, December 07, 2012). This should be a signal to streamline the security and intelligence agencies for a better relationship between the men in uniform and the civilians in promoting mutual understanding and unity.

The order for a thorough investigation into the death of Isaiah Abraham should be strongly supported by the public. How to show the strong support is by a massive peaceful demonstration organised by civil society organizations as a show of solidarity against crimes and insecurity in Juba and also to send a clear message to the criminals that the South Sudanese nation will not tolerate heinous crimes committed on its soil. It is also for the President to appreciate that the public is totally behind him in the perpetual dark hours of insecurity in Juba. If an SPLA soldier and a major can be murdered in cold blood the way Isaiah Abraham was murdered who is safe in Juba. The security and intelligence agencies obviously have a huge responsibility to assure people of their security in Juba.

Lastly, but not the least it is important for the public to consider neighborhoods watch. The principle is that neighbours keep watch of each other’s welfare and property. Any suspicious movement either by day or night by individuals or groups should immediately be spied on or confronted by the people in the neighbourhood. As a sign of solidarity in combating crime, when there are screams or loud noises, neighbours must all pour out from their houses with whatever resources they have to confront what may be a crime to be committed. Neighbours may make a citizen arrest to hand over the suspected criminal to the police.

One advantage of a neighbourhood watch is that it promotes unity in fighting crime. In this way insecurity in the neighbourhood may be reduced. This in turn will ensure people’s safety with a credit to all for being so vigilant.

In conclusion, may God the Almighty rest the soul of Isaiah Abraham in eternal peace. Isaiah’s brilliant writing and commentating will always continue to inspire old and young generations of writers and journalists in his native South Sudan and beyond.

The author can be reached at jklupai@googlemail.com

Remembrance of Isaiah Diing Chan Awuol & Petition to gov’t of South Sudan leadership:

Salva Kiir Mayardit, the president of South Sudan
Riek Machar Teny, the Vice president of South Sudan
Achuil Tito, Inspecting general police
Minister of defense leadership
United Nations and South Sudanese as a whole

Petition to Government of South Sudan leadership:

BY: BOL DENG BOL, USA, DEC/09/2012, SSN;

We the relatives of Isaiah Diing Abraham Chan in the United States of America were bothered by unexpected death that had occurred in December 5, 2012 in the hands of the very government that we fought for years. We condemned those who murdered Diing and the SPLM system for being the threat to development and freedom of expression. Democratic system is all about freedom of political expression, freedom of speech, freedom of press, and the respect of life and dignity. We the relatives of Diing in the U.S. support the freedom of expression as a corner stone to democracy but not dictatorship system in the South Sudan. The same dictatorship system in the Sudan permitted the South to fight the North Sudan because of injustice and marginalization.

We the relatives of Diing Chan in the U.S know that we have lost an Icon that will not return, but we are still waiting patiently for the investigation and justice that was promised by President Salva Kiir Mayardit, the president of South Sudan. For those who do not know Diing Chan Awuol, he came from a strong society that cannot afford his death if this incident was in the warfare, but because thieves ordered by unknown politician(s) that have no idea about democracy caused heartbreak to the entire Padol Section, Kongor community, Twic East County, Bor county, Duk county, and the South Sudan in general. We are not to remain silence because someone who murdered Diing has a feeling and breath like we do in the South Sudan.

Diing Chan’s death must be thoroughly investigated to restore the mind of our community otherwise we have lost hope in SPLM leadership.

Isaiah devoted his energy and time for the well-being of the entire South Sudan. He was the advocate and fought in many battles for the independence of the South Sudan. Those murderers must know that the struggle for the independence was a sacrifice by South Sudanese entirely not just them the leaders. Diing Chan never ever associated or praised tribalism, nepotism, injustice, or corruption in his writings, but he only talked about inhumanity that would affect the future of our Country in the long-run.

He never ever mentioned/talked against Nuer since Nuer faction of Riek Machar killed his brother Awuol Chan Awuol (a major general, too) in Nasir in the 1991 defection. He had even encouraged UN to provide and delivered rations to the people of Akobo for many years despite the fact that Nuer were the ones residing in that region.

Isaiah Diing Abraham was born in 1962 in Kongor area, Twic East County. He comes from Padol sub-clan in Kongor community. Diing was ordained as a pastor in Nairobi in 1998, and served as a deacon in the Narus area of Eastern Equatoria. Dearly, if the Taposa community heard the death of Isaiah, they would have seriously condemned the act like we do because he was the one who always mediated the chiefs from Taposa with the SPLM/A from 1992-1994 around Kapoeta and Narus at the time he was an intelligence and an SPLA official. Taposa community called him Piyo. We do not know the meaning.

Diing has brothers and relatives in the SPLA, police, and wildlife reserve forces in the South Sudan. And he has family of two wives and five children plus several kinships. Job/military career during the second Sudanese civil war, Isaiah Ding Chan Awuol served as military and political officer, he was trained in Bonga in the Tiger battalion of the SPLA achieving the rank of a Shield Seven Captain before he became a major-general in the SPLA.

School/education: Isaiah held a BA in business administration from Day Star University and a masters degree from Nairobi University, Kenya.

We are stopping here because we are still mourning. We know that if we turn sharp objectives on our face like that, then we are going nowhere and the world will laugh at us-South Sudan.

In conclusion, here are some recommendations that we want from our government in the case of the death of our brother in the hands of selfish and greedy politicians.

1. We wanted to encourage our government to bring justice and rule of law to those who committed this horrible heartbreaking to our society be brought to book and face justice.

2. We want interior minister and its deputy to resign immediately because they are not performing their jobs in the capital city. They are definitely not protecting the lives of innocent citizens in and around Juba city.

3. We are demanding the relocation of police and SPLA that conduct night patrol in Juba and we demand a new police force be brought to Juba to protect the lives of the innocent and their properties. It’s become clear that the police in Juba are criminal because they carried out the dirty game directed to them by empty-headed dictators /politicians, they are the ones looting civilians, they are the ones arresting journalists and beating/torture, and warning them as if the government is their property.

4. Finally, that Justice must be served, culprits to be brought to justice. If no suspect, the law enforcement leaderships and authorities must resign immediately to avoid the future deaths among ourselves.

By
1. Bol Deng Bol
2. Bol Diing Duot
3. Diing Arok Anyang
4. Chol Bol Dut
5. Deng Reech Akoy
6. Diar Deng Diar
7. Adeer Mapior Awuol
8. And all
For contact; boldeng21@yahoo.com

Isaiah Abraham’s brutal elimination by extremists is another step to backwardness

QUOTE: “If you accept yourself for what you are, you can accept others for what they are too.” Buddha

BY: ABRAHAM MAKER KUOL, WESTERN AUSTRALIA, DEC/08/2012, SSN;

Isaiah Abraham, aka Isaiah Ding Abraham Chan Awuol, passing is tragic news. Like most of his readers, I could not come to termS with the brutal killing for an intellectual, outspoken, fair-minded commentator. I am so saddened and shocked beyond conscience. His death, without doubts, is another painful, incessant blow to freedom of speech in our country.

Given his numerous informative, insightful and sometimes inspiring articles on relevant issues affecting South Sudanese, I am convinced that the deceased was killed by the wolves in sheep clothing purporting to be serving our government.

Isaiah was an intellectual who truly understood ways to critique a system. None of his article among the heap amounted to sedition. He had never once tried to vilify South Sudan government. His unsparing critique for our corrupted system of governance was positive. In fact, he usually debated pessimists who had never harboured hope for SPLM-led government. He was SPLM/A’s staunch supporter. While he could debate for the SPLM/A, Isaiah never turned blind eyes where the SPLM/A system had failed. Perhaps this was where he garnered enemies who later killed him outrightly.

Guess what… those whom the deceased found himself debating against will go like this: ‘Wish you could come back to life, Isaiah, you would agree to what we told you.’ He was a victim of the Party he supported. Can we blame Isaiah and others who speak up for and against the government? NO. Big NO, all times.

Our views and opinions on government are, supposedly only, the mirror with which the government will see and reflect and decide on how to run a country efficiently and effectively.

Political pundits often hinted that even if one is not interested in politics, politics will always has interest in you!

Political leaders compete just to win you onto their sides. So, if politicians compete for our votes, then we must have opinions on who to support. We must state our visions for our lives. And a politician or a party that meets one’s expectations wins one’s support. Isaiah was, therefore, articulating his views and opinions about the system of governance in our country.

If you (the killer/s) thought that Isaiah had gone too far hence causing his death, then please have courage and come forward and let us know where and how the deceased betrayed South Sudan.

True democratic countries understand the importance of citizens’ participation in political process. Because of this, freedom of expression is enshrined in the Constitution. Such a Constitution allows citizens not only to comment on political issues affecting their lives, but also, their speeches and comments are expressed without fear for they are protected by the Constitution. What did South Sudan Constitution says… what sort of the country we want to see???

Isaiah’s mindset, particularly his writings, had never been tribal. His writings only spared patriots who put National interest before individual interest. He was frank and honest on issues, that’s why his writings are widely read. He was a commentator who called a spade a spade. He could condemn all tribal extremists with all terms.

For all years of his political writing, Isaiah’s tribe had been a mystery to his readers who didn’t knew him in person. I have never thought of him as Dinka from Bor-Twic East, Kongor. His unsparing critique to all tribal allegiance coupling with his unadulterated praise to all patriots regardless of tribes and regions revealed his true uniqueness.

His support for the SPLM/A under Kiir’s leadership, since 2005, was unwavering. Check his writings and you will believe me.

Isaiah was a person of outstanding courage. Such a virtue lured him to risk his youthful life for the National cause/call in 1983 to violently fight for freedom against Arabs oppression. He is a hero who survived violent war of 21 years only to be killed in a process of peaceful struggle for development of his people in South Sudan.

Just as South Sudanese broke off from a frying pan of unjust historical oppression in the North, South Sudanese found themselves plunked into the fire of moral, economics and political corruption in the South. It is such vivid corruption which the deceased sought to criticize.

Despite frequent warnings arguing him to stop writing, Isaiah was braved enough to be who he is, (a true teller, a man of instinctive moral conviction) to face pressure from corrupt peers.

It is so ironic and tragic that the known, high ranking, corrupt officers are left enjoying freedom while innocent citizens are being spied on, stifled, tortured and butchered day in day out. Such a wanton, callous, vicious behaviour reinforce the deep-seated malpractice in the system. As if such behaviour is not shocking enough, our government blub when murder incidence occur that the culprits and perpetrators be brought to Justice. So far, however, no nocturnal killer had been apprehended.

This allowed me and others to hypothesize that the killers are but just uncouth agents serving the most corrupt government’s officers.

Isaiah’s recent call for SPLM/A leadership change (Kiir to be replaced by Riek Machar) come 2015, had nothing so terrifying in it. He was expressing his honest view about the country and the party he loves. Could this be the cause and cost of his head? Only God knows.

As mentioned somewhere by another commentator, we will not bury our heads under the carpets despite such cowardice, cruel, despotic, despicable killing. We will continue to harangue and air our grievances till our government realized that government with virtues is far more superior to government with brutal force.

True “government of the people and for the people” must ensure accessibility for basic government’s services to all people all the times. Government prime function is to improve peoples’ living standard. If this is true, then it is also true that: Till food crisis ceased in our country, we will remain angry citizens. Till health and medical facilities reach all people all over the country; till transportation infrastructures and public institutions are established; till security for all citizens all over the country is ensured; till our people access clean drinking water and modern housing and freedom and opportunity and hope; we will not keep quiet.

Rest in External Peace, Isaiah. Your contributions to freedom for us all deserves our heartfelt appreciation.

Abraham Maker Kuol lives in Perth, Western Australia. He is reachable on mekakuol@gmail.com.

Who Killed Isaiah Abraham?

BY: WAN DIT, Former security member, DEC/07/2012, SSN;

South Sudanese political commentator and analyst, Isaiah Diing Abraham Chan Awuol, who was from Bor, Jonglei State was terminated on 4 December with one bullet to the head at point blank. Famous Isaiah Abraham, the late was fierce and very brave writer who questioned the government. I don’t know if it is wise or brave but his death has made me leave security and tell this.

As a member of security service, there is no organization of information in the security organ. No secrets, we all know and those people with connections know secret information too. Isaiah’s death come as a shock to many people all over the world but those in security, it was made with deafening silence.

However, for those with knowledge and know it was clear he either shut up or be eliminated. What is responsible for his death is his article in which he wrote saying the president must step down. That was the last straw and it was decided to eliminate him.

Once the decision was approved by the big people, those of us with an idea tried to convince otherwise but was difficult without risking my life. I am a small man.

So how was Isaiah killed? Those who know have gone overseas now but we in the security job usually take a person number from the phone companies, Vivacell or zain or MTN, and then we see who you talk with or to often or every time and then we get that person.

That person is then used by the security to get its victims by telephone call or we go their homes.

In the particular case of Isaiah Abraham, he was killed by members of a special protection of president guard unit, called ‘Tiger.’ It is open secret known to all that they have jails in their compound next to the president’s official residence, J1. They have killed many people and buried them there, even including a guy who used the First Lady’s name for business.

So, on that fatal night, Isaiah Diing was called out from his home and was made to sit down and then shot in the head. Only one bullet. He was killed by another Dinka, his tribe people. The murdering people made sure that national security was not patrolling at night in that particular area of Gudele.

So, my brothers, watch out. Security people say the following people are next because of too much talking against the government and ministers.

So, please, brothers watch out. Mabior Garang, Kuir e Garang, Deng Dekeuk, Mading Ngor, Zachariah Manyok Biar, Elhag Paul, Justin Ambago Ramba and James Okuk.

Wandit
Former Security Member

National leadership insanity: Should Pres. Kiir & others abdicate?

Editorial Analysis, NOV. 30/2012, SSN; Lord have mercy! Now that the country’s president, Kiir Mayardit, has publicly confessed to the entire nation that he also is afflicted by and suffering from the mental disease recently diagnosed by his vice, Machar, it is definitely conclusive that South Sudan is being mercilessly ruled by a leadership with sickened mental capacity.

What has surprisingly and shockingly surfaced in Juba, which is no longer a secret, is that both President Kiir and his vice, Machar, along with most SPLM/A current and former liberation war veterans who are also now in top positions of the SPLM-dominated government, are morbidly mentally traumatized, with obvious clinical symptoms and signs of the affliction commonly diagnosed and known as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Echoing his vice president, President Kiir blandly reiterated, while addressing a conference on agriculture and food security in Juba on November 28, that indeed, South Sudan “leaders were mentally traumatized by decades of war and are in need of counselling.” He acquiesced that, “Even me I need people to come around me and talk to me.”

A few days earlier in the week, Dr. Machar (no medical doctor) had brought the whole problem of PTSD into public scrutiny when he was launching a national reconciliation preparatory meeting in Juba which purportedly would seek to heal what he described as serious ‘mental wounds that have visibly divided communities’ due to the ‘prevalence of trauma which is still haunting leaders and communities in the country locking them in mental wars in their minds.’

Presuming that both Dr. Machar and President Kiir are correct in their prognostication of the prevalence and morbidity of PTSD among the top leadership, mostly SPLM/A leaders and the population at large, clearly this potentially doesn’t bode well for the good image and governance of the nation.

Though Machar himself had publicly apologized for and taken complete responsibility for the alleged ‘war crimes’ he personally commissioned and committed against a particular community (Dinka-Bor), his main overriding worry currently is that his repentance and capitulation to Dinka-Bor community in general, and especially to the widow of Late Dr. John Garang in particular, has opened up a dangerous precedence.

Every community (tribe) has the right now to also demand some apology for similar war crimes egregiously inflicted on their people and furthermore, individuals or their relatives, who underwent illegal tortures, imprisonment and other human rights abuses by people now in positions of power during the liberation war, also have the right now to demand some forms of redress.

Certainly, this must include those who worked for the enemy jellaba Arab Sudan also, as many were unquestionably involved in the killings or complicit in the arrests and torture. Some of those jellaba sell-outs are now ministers or top advisers in Kiir’s government.

Understandably, from president Kiir to Machar, down to ministers and commanders, there is genuine anxiety associated with rumination, flashbacks and apprehensions about the probabilities of scenarios of retribution and vengeance unraveling in the country, hence, this explains Dr. Machar’s urgency for the so-called national reconciliation.

Since he has been severely enfeebled and blackmailed by the Dinka-Bor community, Machar is now on a wild goose chase to resuscitate his ambition of becoming the next president even though he is precipitously sliding down a slippery rope.

It isn’t surprising to most citizens and foreign observers of South Sudan that Dr. Machar is practically a lame-duck in Kiir’s government. People once hoped that Machar would stand apart from president Kiir by standing up against the multi-billion dollar corruption, the on-going arbitrary arrest and torture of journalists and human rights campaigners and other unlawful actions.

Enigmatically, Dr. Machar has instead come out vehemently supportive of his boss by minimizing the extent of the corruption and the arrests; he’s practically condoning these unpopular actions of the president’s misrule.

Anyway, what is shocking is that although president Kiir and the others had eight long years to seek the best treatment abroad for their mental affliction by PTSD, the president instead only resorted to some unorthodox and animistic palliation such as relying on the aura of those ‘around him.’

It is very uncommon, for the record, to have top leaders of guerrilla or major wars between nations, e.g. Uganda’s president Museveni or president Bush senior and legendary General Schwarzkopf who launched the US Kuwait liberation from Iraqi, or Israeli commanders like Moshe Dayan, have ever been reportedly suffered or manifested symptoms of PTSD.

In well-documented studies in advanced societies, e.g. USA, the preponderance of PTSD is often among the lower members of the army who supposedly are directly involved in the real physical acts of the battles, such as firing the guns on the front lines, directly committing acts of killing and torture, rape and other egregious crimes. Why president Kiir?

More importantly, however, it must be strongly pointed out at this juncture that PSTD or whatever anxiety disorders these leaders are oppressed and obsessed with, they can’t be taken as lame excuses for the serious failure of governance, absence of the rule of law, rampant corruption and generalized decay now destroying our country.

What should be of urgent significance in the country and a concern to the leadership is the immediate cessation of localized violence between or among the various tribes which are mostly politically motivated by the leaders themselves which is causing unnecessary deaths across the states.

Our kind of politics today under the Kiir-Machar dictatorship is shamefully organized along ethnicity or tribalism; it doesn’t need a rocket scientist to ominously predict that given the way things are being handled, another major fratricide of the 1991 magnitude or worse, might reignite sooner if the current targeted incarceration of top Nuer generals persist, a war that will polarize and engulf the whole nation.

As a consequence, the Kiir-Machar regime has evidently lost confidence even among its supporters as witnessed by the inexplicable absence of the majority of governors from the so-called Governors conference. Perhaps the governors have reasonably sensed the utter futility of supporting a regime that’s not delivering!

The so-called national army, the SPLA, is still much visibly tribalized, badly polarized and practically operates above the law; its appendage, the so-called national intelligence and security service is nothing but a personal security and political tool for one tribe and one leader to intimidate, oppress, incarcerate or even eviscerate any person on command from a tribal hierarchy.

Corruption, the bane of Kiir-Machar reign, is unstoppable and being committed with absolute impunity, while the generalized immiserization of the majority of the population continues unabated.

The economy is in utter ruins, with or without oil revenues. National resources are cheaply on sale to foreigners and the corrupt leaders, the commercial and economic sectors have been taken over by Somalis, Ethiopians, Eritreans, all to the detriment and oppression of the local people.

Embarrassingly, the national police service is nearly dysfunctional, with crime and killing, exacerbated by the appalling economic situation, is rampant and uncontrollable despite the massive recruitment and support from the UNMISS. Citizens are literally paying exorbitant sums of money just to get any service from the police.

Diplomatically, the nation is, for all practical purposes, back into jellaba Arab Sudan suzerainty, not unsurprisingly. The oppressed and impoverished South Sudanese are asking if this is the independence they were promised.

Culturally, as the often sincere and blunt State minister of interior, Salva Mathok, painfully remarked recently, “our younger generation, the hope of the South Sudan nation, is finished.”

The tragedy is that they are becoming morally decadent, uneducated and practically and hopelessly lost in the immoralities engendered by the foreign sex-workers who infested prostitution lodges everywhere in the city, ostensibly licensed by the government and owned by many of the top leadership.

Already a failed state, is it any wonder that the young are now either into drugs and diseases or engaged in cattle raids and recruitment as proxies armies?

Finally, if indeed the nation’s leaders are severely afflicted mentally, psychologically or physically, be it with PTSD or other mental afflictions during the liberation war, that might retard or incapacitate them in carrying out their national functions or duties, some forms of treatments, if not already too late, might just be helpful.

Otherwise, the best thing for the nation’s good is that Kiir must thoroughly scrutinize and cleanse his government. If the prospective patients must be kicked out, that’s acceptable.

Otherwise, if all must abdicate, including the president or the vice, either on their own volition or forcefully ejected due to insanity or some manifestations of the same, that would be still better, as our young nation can’t be efficiently run by mentally tormented leaders! Amen.
By Website Editor

Khartoum has a case against Juba on SPLA-North activities

BY: ISAIAH ABRAHAM, JUBA, NOV/26/2012, SSN;

Sudan and South Sudan have agreed to disagree. The two countries were made to sign an agreement known as Cooperation Agreement two months in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa, the very agreement sponsored by the African Union. The agreement at the moment is running into trouble when the devil(s) emerged in the details. The Security Agreement in particular is overshadowing others in the process of implementation.

Each country has stuck to its old school of finger pointing. The euphoria that was created as a result of the deal (Cooperation Agreement) is quickly turning into anxiety, apprehension and uncertainty.

South Sudan is being denied oil transportation through the Republic of the Sudan as there are reports of aerial bombardments by Khartoum against South Sudan. The United Nations Mission on the ground is conspicuously in the hiding, while the African Union is lip tied on accusation and counter accusations between the two countries of the Sudan.

Chronically, the Sudanese leaders from day one have charged that South Sudan is supporting and harboring their dissidents and are arming rebels fighting their government. The world has all along stack odds against Juba on this matter of SPLA-North; that Juba should sever its link with the rebels fighting Khartoum regime. The United States of America in (USA) in particular was critical, a confirmation of which that led to scandalous alleged apology written by President Salva to President Obama Hussien of the USA.

South Sudan Information Minister has since attempted to undo the damage to no avail. What on earth could it be that a leader of another country will have to kneel down to another leader in another part of the world? South Sudanese conscience was wounded if the purported letter was indeed written and dispatched to Washington.

But the sequence of theories helps us understand where did things go wrong in the first place for the Government of the Republic of South Sudan. Before anyone jumps to poke blame against the Republic of the Sudan for A and B matters and condemn it, there is an compelling need to reexamine our approach toward Sudan and see whether there is somewhere we can find accommodation for our good relationship.

We should also be an active solution-oriented partner than being stuck in our comfortable closet of being dismissive of Khartoum. Therefore the charge that our country is supporting SPLM/A-North must not be thrown out of the window just because Sudanese were our enemies.

By the way, I don’t like this name call ‘South Sudan,’ it confuses us with the Sudan. Who are the Sudanese and who aren’t? After July 9, 2011, I should have named my country something else. Nile or Azania remains my favorites names, not an amorphous thing call ‘South Sudan.’. Anyway we are straying.

Our differences with Khartoum were all about our political destiny and that was squarely achieved on July 9, 2011. It was the hardest part of it all! The Sudanese to their credit made a bold move to recognize us, and the rest of the world joined them. We parted ways in a civilized manner something that surprises many. We are no longer enemies with the Republic of the Sudan but just neighbors.

They need us and we need them. Differences that are there are normal between and among neighbors. Neighbors quarrel and still maintain their socio-economic ties. Even Israel is doing the same with Egypt and others.

We must not let SPLA-North spoil our relationship with the Sudan. For the sake of peace at the border, it’s time to ask the rebels fighting the North to stop their activities now. We want borders open and movement of goods, people and services to flow. We need South Sudan and Sudan relations so urgently.

The argument by South Sudan leaders that the matter of SPLM/A-North is an internal matter doesn’t hold water. It is not enough in itself. How about our charge that Dr. Lam Akol of the Democratic Change and Major David Yau Yau are supported by Khartoum, isn’t that not an internal affair of our country?

Why do we call their differences with their rebels ‘internal affair’ and never call ours the same?

We must choose between peace and war and not both. Peace is what our people want, not war. Khartoum will continue to find a reason to disturb our hard-won peace. They will go for feeble-hearted and apologists like Dr. Lam to press their case against us.

Khartoum might not be realistic in their demand on disarmament of their dissidents, but we aren’t being truthful. One of the Azania’s (South Sudan) strategic goal is peace and development so as to improve the living standards of our people. Our leaders must demonstrate to Khartoum their willingness to open a new chapter, so for our people to enjoy peace and development after ages of neglect.

Denying must be flavored. South Sudan isn’t doing its diplomatic responsibility. Khartoum has stolen the show there. Everything is upside down as we chase after rotten image. The United Nations Mission in our land is breathing fire on our necks. They are everywhere wiring nasty things against us.

When it comes to issues like the bombardment of South Sudan, unfortunately they are nowhere and when it comes to negativity on anything against South Sudan they’re in hand to report to New York and Brussels. I suspect they have given a word that South Sudan is indeed supporting SPLM/A-North. The United Nations Humanitarian Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) decried one moment when they spotted soldiers of Revolutionary Forces in Yida Camp. No single leader from South Sudan came out to deny or refute what the UNHCR was saying, a proof that something is indeed going on right there.

Our leadership in Juba should not live the lie that the world doesn’t know who arms rebels fighting Khartoum. UN Mission is informing them about every activity in our land. Moreover Khartoum has their own informers, Southerners whose loyalty is divided, especially those on the payroll of Khartoum, those that claim to be opposition groups but they aren’t. The Democratic Change of Lam Akol is on top of things.

We have also many Northerners around and they could provide relevant information about the presence of some rebels around some cities in the country. May be there is no hard proof that Juba is in indeed supporting rebels, but the simple truth that we never severed our links with the SPLA-North more radically keeps some doubts hanging that South Sudan is backing the rebels fighting the regime in Khartoum.

It will be painful to do just that radical move, however; these people (Nuba Mountains, Fur, Masalit, Zangawa, Funj, etc) are closely associated with South Sudan. We will help them on matters of peace and development. The world should have helped them in their political predicament.

But we are also not any better; we ought to talk to Northern rebels to join the march for peace and stop using our territory as spring board to topple our neighbor. We can go further to pledge material support for their development and not guns and ammunitions. Through force a change will not be meaningful in Khartoum, after all, the rebels have no unified agenda for change there.

Dr. Khalil Ibrahim’s outlook was more unifying than our current tribal warlords. South Sudan would have been available then if they had joined our struggle to effect change in Khartoum. After the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), particularly after independence of South Sudan, we have evolved into a different entity.

As for Khartoum, they must show maturity and patience against the Republic of South Sudan. They got to kick out Lam Akol and stop supporting David Yau Yau or any other clandestine groups. Time for injecting new spirit and cooperation is here. They got to respect the agreement they have signed with the Republic of South Sudan. They should cease fire on the air against innocent civilians.

Their rebels aren’t Southerners and our people can’t going to die again like that. They should allow oil production to resume and stop their rogue media from making inflammatory remarks against South Sudan leaders or the ruling political party in the country (the SPLM).

If Juba is wrong Khartoum must not go wrong also.

Isaiah Abraham lives in Juba; Isaiah_abraham@yahoo.co.uk

Juba & Khartoum : They want to be both Partners and Enemies at the same time and Expect Progress!

BY: Justin Ambago Ramba, UK, NOV. 17/2012, SSN;
To set the platform for the arguments that will follow, we would all want to assume even if only once, that there is no any slightest doubt in the back of our minds on the fact that the current Chairperson of the Commission of the African Union (AU) will deliver more solutions to the continent’s problems far more than her predecessors. This much will be wonderful.

We would also like to believe that Ms. Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma must have come to office with the full knowledge of South Sudan and Sudan conflicts and that she too is also aware of Khartoum’s long records of dishonoring Agreements. It would also count as a bonus.

If all that is said above is true then the AU new boss’s comments made on Saturday 10th November 2012 will clearly go down as a true reflection of her anticipated expectation on the future of this African Union Implementation High Panel (UNHIP) brokered Comprehensive Cooperation Agreement (CCA) between President Salva Kiir and President Omer al Bashir.

Without much ado at this stage the right thing to do is obvious. We have to thank God that Ms. Zuma is quick enough to realize that things are not going well as far as the implementation of the so-called Comprehensive Cooperation Agreement (CCA) recently signed between South Sudan and Sudan is concerned.

She (Dlamini Zuma) too did well to recognize that the meeting between the South Sudan and Sudan committees that took place in Juba, the capital of South Sudan was nothing but a complete failure. That’s like keeping on top of issues, isn’t it?

So it was also a great move from her side when she explicitly expressed her concerns and frustration over the delay in the operationalization of the buffer zone between the two countries which by all means remains to be the centerpiece in the 27th September 2012 Addis Ababa Cooperation Agreement.

Nonetheless, for those of us who have meticulously followed the history of the countless agreements signed by Khartoum be it in Addis Ababa or elsewhere, we are not in any way surprised by the way how the delegations from the two countries concluded the first leg of their technical committee’s meeting in Juba. Failure to agree is what they do best. In other words they seem to have beforehand agreed to disagree!

Sadly enough though it’s only now that it has become abundantly clear to all including those that saw us as prophets of doom, that the whole meeting in Juba was an utter failure, for the simple fact that Khartoum which refuses to talk to its northern rebels of the SPLM-North had strangely enough tried to use the Juba meeting to forge an SPLM/NCP anti-SPLM-North front which would have then gone out to win the war in favor of this crazy Islamist clique.

In short the Juba Meeting can be summarized as a meeting where the two sides consumed all their time disagreeing on how to deal or not deal with the SPLM-North rebels who are now fighting the Khartoum regime. This if anything, it stands to tell you what the NCP Islamists intend to extract from this so-called Cooperation Agreement, and probably it may be their sole reason for wanting to normalize with South Sudan.

Ms Zuma also rightly responded promptly to her instinct that warned her of the possible collapse of this hard earned truce and she did well to remind both Juba and Khartoum that the whole world is watching their moves. Her emphases about the need for the full and timely implementation of the security arrangements, which will in turn enhance confidence between the two States is well placed.

However Ms Zuma will need to go yet another step further if the AU is to ever see a practical implementation of this so called Cooperation Agreement between the two Sudans take place on the ground. For as things stand it is indeed illogical to expect a full and timely smooth implementation of an agreement that was entirely sealed under external pressure without continuing to exert the same pressure throughout the course of events.

Reasons behind Khartoum signing the agreement in the first place:

Long time ago the author had warned about how Khartoum will change its stance in the last minute and sign any agreement proposed by the AUHIP of former President Thabo Mbeki with the sole aim of escaping the UN Security Council’s deadline. And it has come to pass just as speculated.

To further confirm what the author had written earlier, we are now face to face with Khartoum which has always dishonored truces. And what we are seeing now is that even before the ink on the Cooperation Agreement could dry, the old foxes of Khartoum are already back to what they do best and that’s to put hurdles on the way of implementing any agreement they sign, while at the same time pretending as if they are really serious about the implementation.

We all know that the Cooperation Agreement requests the two governments (Juba & Khartoum) to refrain from supporting rebel groups in the two countries. It can also mean that the two countries may also have to play positive roles in order to bring about peaceful settlements to each other’s problems.

So far so good, however Khartoum by the nature of its Jihadist orientation doesn’t in fact believe in a peaceful settlement in any of its countless rebellions with groups known to operate within the Greater Darfur and many others all along the nearly 2000 km border with the new republic of South Sudan.

This is obviously the case for while South Sudan has openly voiced its suspension of assistance to SPLM-North which is now a foreign organization or at least should be seen so, yet it is never denied its support for what it considers a just cause for which the northern comrades (Nuba Mountains, Blue Nile and the various Darfuri rebel groups) are fighting for. On the same theme Juba went on to suggest its willingness to help mediate for a peaceful settlement for its northern neighbor’s crises, a role of course never appreciated by the Islamists who rule over the Republic of Sudan (North).

This same position would have been adopted by the SPLM leadership in Juba should the Islamist NCP government In Khartoum offer to mediated a settlement between Juba and the David Yau Yau’s rebels. At least this helps the reader to see the other angles of what in fact is a multi-faceted crisis.

At any rate it is equally worth stressing here that although Khartoum has long since made up its mind not to go in the direction of having South Sudan as a player that can help bring about a peaceful settlement in Darfur, the Nuba Mountains or the Blue Nile region, yet for purely propaganda purposes it continuously prefers to highlight the link between these rebel groups and the SPLM government in Juba.

As part of the NCP’s bigotry mind set it cannot and will not especially after its bitter experience with the Naivasha Agreement (the CPA) opt again for any truce where it will be requested to share power with other armed groups. The NCP is not ready to do that with any of the various Darfur rebel groups nor is it ready to do so with the SPLM-North and of course even more unthinkable with the recently formed the Sudanese Revolutionary Front (SRF).

What President Omer al Bashir and his think tanks of the hardline Islamists in the other Arab countries the likes of Sheikh Yusuf al Qaradawi and the cohort want in the Sudan is a total military victory over all the rebel groups for the fact that these rebel groups are largely drawn from the indigenous Black African populations and are at the same time advocating for a secular Sudanese state.

For a keen observer it’s easy to see that Khartoum made efforts to conceal its main motive behind the signing of the Addis Ababa Cooperation Agreement. All that it sees it is yet another golden opportunity to replicate and establish in place another Idris Deby in Juba. If such a replica can be produced, Khartoum is dreaming for the joint assault on the rebels by the two neighboring countries. No wonder that the NCP is determined to drag South Sudan into what is realistically an all-North-North crisis.

But what do you as a concerned viewer think would be the response of the SPLM led government in Juba towards this weird position taken and adopted by the Islamists of the NCP? Of course as old time comrades the SPLM led government in Juba may find it somehow embarrassing to completely disengage with the SPLM-North, a choice they will have to weigh carefully against the backlash of continuing to lose the much needed Oil revenue that can only come by fully normalizing with Khartoum.

Again in the hope of achieving the New Sudan dream, the SPLM leadership in Juba is required by its ideology to stick to the total eradication of all the injustice in the center of power in Khartoum if they are to have the Sudan of their dream (united or fragmented) especially when the rosy dream of building the alternative oil pipeline to the Indian ocean is not easily forthcoming as initially and naively expected.

What do the cooperation agreements mean to different people?

Now for the SPLM led government in Juba this Cooperation Agreement with Khartoum should offer the much needed breathing space and financial relief for the regime in the face of the well-known self-inflicted economic suffocation that followed the abrupt closure of the country’s Oil industry.

President Salva Kiir who continues to suspect a military coup in the making will be very happy to have the inflow of the Oil dollars as it will enable him to continue buying the necessary and much needed loyalty within the military establishment and the other opportunistic politicians that his regime badly needs for survival at this particular moment in time.

In Khartoum it cannot be overstressed that the NCP dominated regime will want to get back to popularity by injecting the billions of dollars that it will get as a subsidy by Juba once the Oil resumes export through the Khartoum owned pipeline.

But as already mentioned elsewhere in this article, this Cooperation Agreement also provides the cunning NCP with what it considers as a golden opportunity … a rare one which it can exploit at wish in order to twist the arms of the SPLM in Juba to either accept and play “Idris Deby like role in the region” or languish under the already self-inflicted economic embargo!.

As for the opposition political parties in both South Sudan and Sudan, conscious of the fact that each group has to work within the frame work established following the Independence of the former from trhe latter, they both know very well that the future of the two neighboring countries depends on how peacefully the relationship between the two now separate entities can be maintained.

The two economies will obviously do better through border trading and free movements of people and goods. However they (the opposition parties) are also aware of the fact that any improvement in their individual countries’ economies will definitely translate into the two totalitarian regimes to not only cling to power, but also improve their chances of isolating the others even the more through the abuse of public coffers.

For the rebels of the Republic of Sudan (SPLM-N & the Darfur rebels), the Cooperation Agreement is indeed a thing to worry about especially when issues like the creation of a demilitarized buffer zone are considered central to its successful implementation.

But as the rebels claim that they are controlling more than 40 percent of what is known to be an ill-defined borders between the two countries, it even becomes more the point that the border issues can only be effectively addressed when Khartoum reaches settlement with these rebel groups.

The other group represents the Sudanese refugees in South Sudan, the Southern Sudanese and Sudanese populations living along the border areas and those South Sudanese living in the North and the North Sudanese living in the South. These groups do see in the Cooperation Agreement a rare opportunity for them to lead a decent life wherever they live at the moment given the “Four Freedoms” are packaged in the cooperation truce.

Where does all the above leave the Addis Ababa Cooperation Agreement (CCA) from being understood or being misunderstood – from being correctly interpreted or being completely misinterpreted – from being timely, fully and correctly implemented or to altogether end up in the extreme case scenario, but the most likely, whereby agreements after agreements share the common fate of being dumped in the dust bin without the least implementation (e.g. Malik Agar/Nafie Ali Nafie – Addis Ababa Agreement). This is where Ms. Zuma should concentrate her efforts, if she is to do anything different from what her predecessors did for peace in the Sudan(s)

However our generous advice to Ms. Zuma at this juncture is that, whatever reports she gets from her former South Africa’s President Thabo Mbeki on the Sudanese Politics; she must take it with a pinch of salt. Mbeki quitted the Darfuri dossier without a clear break through, Abyei is another dilemma on his hands and God knows what he will do with the difficulty to implement Addis Ababa Cooperation Agreement between the two countries.

There’s no intention of the author of this article to undermine the AUHIP (Thabo Mbeki’s group) skills in mediating between SPLM and the NCP, however let the truth be told and be made known to the entire world that there is no room left for the two ruling parties (the SPLM & NCP) to cooperate on any issues of mutual benefit be it political or economic given the fact that the two just cannot work together.

The real PEACE in this region lies outside the domains of both the SPLM and the NCP and unless a true democracy prevails in Juba and Khartoum altogether under new regimes, the two countries will likely remain at loggerheads for decades to come.

These two countries are already the worst failed states in the world and the peace, security and development that they have failed to provide for their citizens, just doesn’t exist for them to provide to one another. This is a neighborhood where love has long since been replaced by hatred.

Let us also not forget that these two (the SPLM & NCP) regimes have long been fatigued by war and if anything they have both run out of ideas. Both are playing their cards now not that they want to win or to lose, but in fact their ultimate goal is just to remain in the game as long as possible regardless of what they are actually capable or incapable of delivering to their people.

Both the SPLM and the NCP must come to terms with this, “They cannot be both Partners and Enemies at the same time and expect any progress in the so-called Cooperation Agreement! But most urgently is that the UA under Ms Zuma leadership must clearly understand the true dynamics of the politics in this sub-region. Nothing here resembles the textbook stories and this is indeed a lesson overdue!”

Author Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba. He is Secretary General of the United South Sudan Party (USSP). Can be reached at: justinramba@aool.co.uk or justinramba@doctors.net.uk

South Sudan: To Either Abide With Human Rights and Cooperate with the UNMISS or Quit the UN Family All Together!

BY: Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba, UK, NOV. 10/2012, SSN;

Following the expulsion of the UNMISS Human Rights Investigator, Sandra Beidas (a British National), from South Sudan, this new country seems to have opened yet another chapter in a wider confrontation with the international community.

This development surprisingly comes at a time when the very Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation who declared Ms. Beidas a persona non grata is desperately appealing for international assistance in settling the Abyei question in the face of the difficulties to the yet to be consolidated Addis Ababa Cooperation Agreement recently inked between the Republic of South Sudan and the unpredictable regime in Khartoum.

However the ultimate reasons behind this move by South Sudan’s government which gave this UN Official no more than a period of 48 hours to leave the country have not yet been officially disclosed.

In the absence the government’s official version of the story, the vacuum in information has led to the widespread general speculation that the South Sudan’s ruling party the SPLM as well as its military wing, the SPLA have both been angered by a UN report that was pilled and published in August 2012. Now as things stand this speculation is gradually turning out to be right.

In that report the UN came out criticizing the South Sudan army (SPLA) and accused it of incidents of torture, rape, killings and abducting civilians during the civilian disarmament campaign in South Sudan’s Jonglei State.

Earlier on, this very report which raised a lot of controversy had already been rejected by the Governor of Jonglei State. The Chairperson of the South Sudan’s Human Rights Commission and The SPLA spokesperson,were quick in joining the Governor in condemning the UN Report that they all described as a bunch of lies and a 100% nonsense.

The current situation on the ground

The issues of who decides policies in the new republic of South Sudan have since long surfaced as a central concern for both its citizens and its government of the day. Equally concerned with the matter are the countless institutions that represent the international community, the foreign governments and all the other stakeholders who operate in the country.

It’s no longer a secret that although on the face value all political and socioeconomic players in the country prefer to be seen as operating under the instructions of the de jure political leadership of President Salva Kiir Mayardit, yet the realities at the terminals where policies are eventually translated into actions, things tend to suggest the contrary as multiple de facto deal sealers continue to dominate the scene.

The new country’s army, the SPLA has already had two bitter military confrontations with its traditional rival, the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF). The first was over Abyei, where a SPLA soldier was alleged to have started the shooting at a time when the SAF were at the point of withdrawal from the area as requested by both the UNSC and the AU. What followed thereafter was a full blown battle and it resulted in the total destruction of Abyei town, and the neighbouring villages with displacement of the inhabitants.

The second battle between SPLA the SAF was the Panthou/Heglig war and again it was obvious that this was equally decided by a field commander in response to recurrent SAF attacks on SPLA positions. Unfortunately while the government of south Sudan was far from prepared for this war in as far as the political and diplomatic ground works are concerned, knee jerk decision taken by this field commander almost dragged the region into yet another unplanned all-out war.

Where we stand now as a country it can no longer be denied that this last military showdown with the North is actually behind the legacy that we are living today as it drew in a lot of international condemnation, more so from friends before the enemies.

Back in Juba the SPLM led and dominated government was too slow to explain nor defend its position in as far as the accusations by the international community where Juba was considered not only the aggressor, but also condemned for occupying a foreign territory, as it failed to convince both the US administration, the African Union (AU) and the UN Security Council (UNSC) about its claim on Panthou/Heglig.

With a weak foreign policy and the absence of a competent and robust diplomatic representation in New York, South Sudan was easily muzzled into accepting the UNSC’s position that considered the presence of the SPLA troops in Panthou/Heglig illegal. And before we knew anything, the once victorious SPLA was ordered to pull out and hand the land they so fiercely fought for back to the enemies in Khartoum.

Another incidence where the SPLM led administration in Juba is seen to be weak when it comes to dealing with the SPLA ( the Military) is in fact how the financial books at the Bilpham military Head Quarters continuously escapes the auditing process that has long started in the country.

The Auditor General Hon. Steven Wundu is yet to present to the South Sudan National Parliament the full findings on the finances of the President’s Office, the Ministry of Presidential Affairs and that of the Ministry of Defense.

Till such a report is presented by the Auditor General, our country’s transparency policy will remain at its best a mockery. There are general feelings that any financial auditing of the above centers of power are likely to reveal corruptions that will no doubt dwarf the missing $4 billion being used by the President as his favorite weapon against some of his former and current officials.

The fall out with the UN:

Besides the United Nations (UN) involvement with the Humanitarian Assistance to South Sudan during the long years of the protracted liberation war and well beyond the cease fire between the two enemies to the signing of the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA), this International League of Nations continues to assist South Sudan as it emerges from the rubble of war to become a new nation with full membership in the League.

Today as we hear about the widespread news of how the SPLM led government in Juba has fallen out with some officials of the United Nation Mission in South Sudan (the UNMISS) it may however be a good thing to refresh our collective memories about how the country ended up with these Blue Helmets on the ground in the first place and how it all developed to Chapter VII thereafter.

Things all started during the early phases of the marathon peace talks between SPLM and the Islamic regime in Khartoum that took place in Kenya between 2002 and 2005.

It was in fact the SPLM/A delegation to the Peace Talks who insisted on the deployment of a UN Peacekeeping Force in the country, while the Khartoum government had consistently opposed the idea.

How much did this UN Peacekeeping Force contribute to the actual realization and preservation of Peace in the period between 2005 and 2011 is left for the Sudanese across the political divide to assess.

Following the outcome of the referendum on self-determination in which South Sudanese overwhelmingly chose independence from Sudan, it was again the SPLM led government in Juba that insisted on retaining the UN Peacekeeping Forces on its territory while Khartoum opted to send them out, and this was how UNMISS came to exist in the post-independence South Sudan.

The general resentment being lately expressed by some segments of the South Sudan government against the UNMISS are in fact to some extend based on narrow party, tribal or personal interests.

It is the leadership in Juba that has failed the people of South Sudan by employing incompetent loyalist and tribesmen in the government apparatus.

Unfortunately when things go bad, something often expected of a substandard personnel, this very SPLM led government and its apologists are quick to sing their monotonous and over used song of “we are just starting from scratch or We have just come from the bush etc… etc.”

Unfortunately although the above excuses are being used in order to escape criticism, what the ruling SPLM party fails to see is that in so doing they have also painted a bad picture of not only the government but also of the country.

Under this type of impression South Sudanese are either collectively seen by outsiders as incompetent people or often loosely referred to as lazy and largely a people suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome as a result of the two decade war. It is this impression that encourages foreigners to feel justified when they meddle into the country’s affairs. After all it has been directly taken from the mouth of either the president of the country himself or his close aides.

The repercussion of expelling the UN Human Rights Officer:

What took place right from the time of when the CPA was being negotiated and throughout its implementation the SPLM/A dominated delegations that represented the people of South Sudan have demonstrated that when it comes to international politics, they are indeed far naive than their counterparts on the other side if not for the continuous assistance from the international community..

It is they the SPLM) who handed the sovereignty of the state to the international community. It’s understandable that they did it in order to keep Khartoum away from reneging on the agreement and equally to guarantee a credible monitoring for its implementation. The introduction of the UN Chapter VII into the South Sudan & Sudan/UN politics if anything it is a strong proof that the UNSC is keen to see that Peace, Order, the Rule of Law and full respect of Human Rights return and prevail in South Sudan first then the region a large.

But now that Juba is increasingly becoming uncomfortable with the UNMISS which it fought to have in the first place, then it’s likely that it will lose many of its friends who are not only permanent members of the UNSC, but they also played crucial roles in the realization of the independence of the new country.

The UNMISS boss herself a former government minister in her native country of Norway has been known for her strong ties with the ruling SPLM since the days of the liberation war and throughout the marathon negotiations that led to the signing of the CPA.

Today as things stand in Juba, it will not be an over statement to say that the very SPLM/A that benefitted from her support in the past, is now at the verge of openly label her as persona non grata if she doesn’t stop talking about SPLM and SPLA’s poor Human Rights records and the widespread corruption that has lately engulfed the new country in its entirety.

The US government on the other hand has already come up to openly condemn the expulsion of the UNMISS Officer. The Acting Spokes son at the US State Department, has made it abundantly clear that his government fully supports the UNMISS and its efforts to strengthen government institutions, provide humanitarian relief, and to monitor, mitigate and prevent conflict throughout South Sudan.

The Senior US Official went on to stress that and I quote:

“Human rights monitoring, investigation and reporting are core elements of the UNMISS mandate. It is important that the Mission’s Human Rights Officers are allowed to carry out this work without fear of reprisal or expulsion,” Toner said.

“Fostering deeper respect for fundamental freedoms and human rights will strengthen South Sudan’s democratic civil and national identity, as well as encourage further progress in that regard.” He added.

Reading the US government’s position on this issue and considering the fact that it has always been Ms. Susan Rice, the US Permanent Representative to the United Nation who time and time again stood with South Sudan in its disputes with the republic of the Sudan, one can see that this new country is likely to frustrate its intimate friends.

The issue of Human Rights will remain central in the South Sudan politics be it locally or internationally. Furthermore, whether this plays to the taste of those who formulate policies for this embattled SPLM led regime or not, one is certain that the country needs the UN more than the UN needs the country and especially so at this crucial moment when every thing is in tatters.

The SPLM led government in Juba may think itself smart when it is given the free hand to isolate the actions of UNMISS staff whom they disagree with and then proceed to deal with them as individuals often away from the mother organization, the United Nations in New York.

However let’s not forget to appreciate that these individuals on their own are just as effective as any of us. Nonetheless the UN must stand by its members of staff if it is to succeed in its mission specially so in volatile regions like South Sudan.

Allowing host governments to treat UN staff members as if they were just mere individuals in spite of the fact that these UN Reports do in fact represent the organization’s view doesn’t really go well and no specific individual staff should be crucified for it as if they are just ordinary attention seekers or people who represent no one but themselves.

For how long will this go on? Not too long the former UN Human Rights officer Benedict Sannoh was ruthlessly beaten up by the South Sudan police personnel in Juba, the new country’s seat of government, and now they have expelled yet another UN Human Rights Investigator. At the local level Members of the Civic Society, Journalists, Opposition Politicians and Human Rights Activities are routinely being harassed, beaten and continue to suffer arbitrary arrests by security personnel.

The world needs to act and fast. Otherwise for how long will the donor community continue to pour in its hard earned taxpayer’s money from the western countries into this system of governance that has failed to come into grips with the basic principles of Human Rights?

In conclusion there must be a way out of this new country’s Human Rights Crisis whether SPLM wants it or not. No country or any society for that matter should be allowed to terrorize its citizens by denying them what is easily taken for granted in most parts of the civilized world.

UNMISS is there to stay in South Sudan specially so when the current leadership needs to be re-cultivated into the universally accepted human values of democracy, freedom of speech, and Human Rights in its broadest term.

This can only be achieved by more resilient Human Rights activists on the ground, dedicated and motivated investigators and die hard propagators. I don’t mind if UNMISS is to cease all other activities in South Sudan and concentrated only on Human Rights, for that is the only way to build a peaceful and inclusive society on the rubble of the five decade war that has practically destroyed all the fabrics of humanity and civilization in this part of the world.

The other alternative available for the proud and arrogant SPLM leadership is of course to remain defiant and possibility quit the UN family of nations all together if they have the guts for that. Let us now see who will blink first, the SPLM led government of South Sudan or the UNMISS as backed by the UNSC and the international community at large!!!

Author: Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba. Secretary General of the United South Sudan Party (USSP). He can reached at: justinramba@aol.co.uk or justinramba@doctors.net.uk

As Pres. Bashir cries over Yarmouk Weapons Factory, thanks to whoever did the job!

BY: Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba, UK, NOV. 6/2012, SSN;
In the last week of the last month of October 2012 the worlds audiovisual media was taken up by the news of the bombing of what came to be known later as the Sudan secretive weapons factory located in the heart of Khartoum south, in the Shaggara area. It was indeed breaking news of a special taste to the Sudanese across the political divide and the world community at large.

If you are from Darfur, the Blue Nile region, the Nuba Mountains or the Republic of South Sudan, then this must have been a happy day for you. After all the Yarmouk factory that specialized in the production of lethal weapons and munitions is no more. God must have heard and responded to the prayers of the millions who lost loved ones, suffered injuries and those displaced as a direct or indirect result of weapons, bombs and munitions produced in this once infamous facility.

Khartoum with the help of its allies in Tehran has for many years tormented the lives of women and child across the country. The fact that Sudan is a country at war with itself makes the very idea of building a war production facility with the sole aim of exterminating its own citizens totally unpopular not only with the rest of the peace loving nations, but it must have found no approval from God the Creator Himself as opposed to what the Islamist bigots would want us to believe.

The history of foreign air strikes on the Sudan is a long one. Following the bombing of the secretive chemical project in Khartoum North (Bahri) by the US during President Bill Clinton term in office, this embattled country under its vision-less leaders had suffered other attacks on its eastern coast. Since then every time an airstrike takes place against Sudan many covert activities, the government is quick to blame it on the Jewish state of Israel. This time around however it seems that the shock was too much for it took Khartoum many hours before it finally did what it normally does and that is by again pointing the finger at Israel.

Whatever sufferings the people of Darfur, Blue Nile, Nuba Mountains or even the new republic of South Sudan are made to go through, it can no longer be doubted that the Islamic Republic of Iran definitely has a hand in it. No wonder that Tehran is the hand and Khartoum is the glove!

The Israeli government on the other hand has decided to put a lid on this issue. It neither confirms it nor does it deny it. However many Jewish media outlets already glorified the raid and they see it as a warm-up to the bombing of the much controversial Iranian Nuclear Plants.

Sudan says that the bombing incidence will never stop them from supporting the Hamas led government in Gaza. However this is exactly what the Israelis want to hear. At least it justifies their hostility towards Khartoum and gives them a reason to bomb it again.

And again as if to push the Islamist regime in Khartoum into yet a deeper corner, the Iranians made no secret of their love affair with this criminal government. Israel got what it wanted as a proof for just a few days after the bombing of the Yarmouk munitions factory (widely believed to have been constructed by Iranian money and expertise and is in fact being run by them), two Iranian warships docked at the Sudanese port of Port Sudan. This if anything, it confirms the Khartoum-Tehran deals and love affair.

All these developments did not go well with the Sudanese masses who are predominantly Sunni Muslims and they find it extremely uncomfortable to put up with what has become a massive Iranian Shiite presence in almost each and every square inch of Khartoum City, the countrys capital.

The average Sudanese Sunnis are beginning to show concern about their government total dependence on Tehran, while risking the loss of relationship with Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and rich Gulf States like Qatar.

But of course at the end of the day who am I to advise the enemies in Khartoum. After all the purpose of my writing this piece is in fact to remind the al Bashir regime that for every predator on earth, there is a tougher predators to keep it under control.

Ali Karti the Sudanese foreign minister, can now is heard shouting at the top of his voice like a rabid animal in condemnation of what he sees as a wrong decision when the Iranian vessels were allowed to dock at Port Sudan.

The senior Sudanese diplomat is obviously salivating to get financial support from Arab Gulf countries to help with his countrys ailing economy. He knows too well that with the exposure of the true extend of to which the Khartoum-Tehran cooperation has reached, no Arab Gulf State will be willing to retain any intimacy with Sudan under Bashir.

The time has also come for al Bashir and his National Congress Party (NCP) to acknowledge that the ill equipped army they seem to be betting on is only fit for killing innocent women and children since they are nothing but digitally programmed religious fanatics whose sole function is to indiscriminately drop barrels of explosive materials on any moving target in what is perceived by the bigot state as the Enemy Territory..

We all regret any loss of lives that might have resulted from the raid on the Yarmouk Killing Facility. However the truth be said and loud, for our people have so many suffered in the hands of al Bashir and his Mujahedeen (Al Qaeda in the Sudan), that the news of this bombing deserves nothing, but a national celebration.

And this is To Whom It May Concern, Please whoever bombed this notorious munitions factory in the heart of Khartoum, deserves a medal of the highest status from the people of Darfur, the Nuba Mountains, the Blue Nile and the Republic of South Sudan.

As we sincerely endeavor to see peace reign in our region, it is our wish that sooner than later that the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) fleets of Antinov which rains bombs day and night over our innocent brothers and sisters should also meet the same fate like the infamous Yarmouk weapons factory. Can someone do that for us?!

As for the residents of the Sudanese capital city, this is the first time for them to have a firsthand experience of what it means to be bombed from the air. At least now they are in a position to understand and appreciate the sufferings of their fellow countrymen who are exposed to this type of terror and horror on a daily basis.

The only difference between the two is that one group is forced to pay the price of their government wrong policies while the other group in the marginalized areas have theirs perpetrated by the Sudanese Army who on the contrary is supposed to protect them.

In the end do not you agree with me that those who suffered and continue to do so as a result of the indiscriminately aerial bombardments by the Khartoum regime have every right to celebrate the bombing of this notorious Yarmouk Killing Facility?

Author: Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba. The Secretary General of the United South Sudan Party (USSP). He can be reached at: justinramba@aol.co.uk or justinramba@doctors.net.uk

Appeasing local leaders on Abyei or the Mile 14 Area will come at a cost

By: Justin Ambago Ramba, UK, NOV. 3/2012, SSN;
No wonder that the implementation of the Comprehensive Cooperation Agreement (CCA) signed on 27 September 2012 between the two Sudans which includes oil exportation and security arrangement as well as trade border, is back in limbo following Khartoum rejection of the African Union Peace and Security Council (AUPSC) unanimous position on Abyei.

The AUPSC in its bid to sort out things chose to give both Sudan and South Sudan a period of six weeks in which it is hoped that the two sides may be able to reach a negotiated settlement on the border demarcation but especially so on how to hold the referendum in Abyei come October 2013.

However what followed is typical of the Sudanese north versus south politics. South Sudan approved the AUPSC decision, while Khartoum chose to reject it.

The nomadic Messeiriya Arabs have already expressed their disagreement to Khartoum proposal of dividing Abyei into two parts between Sudan and South Sudan. Surprising though it is, Russia, an old ally to Khartoum, who supports the view to divide the territory, even when the Arab nomads oppose it. Probably it is time that Khartoum realizes that it is the Messeiriya Arabs and not the Russians who will be affected by any decision taken on Abyei.

If at all the Messeiriya Arab nomads are genuine in their demands for water and pasture, then an undivided Abyei will offer that for them on the condition that they do not lay any claims to the land. The current territory of Abyei has already been granted to the nine Dinka Ngok chieftains by the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague.

It beats any logic to hear that Khartoum and their proxies in the Messeiriya are still eyeing to have the post-PCA Abyei. Khartoum may want to have a part of this Oil rich territory because of its mineral resources and that is why it suggests the territory be divided.

However that might not be their sole aim, as the National Congress Party (NCP) of Al Bashir could as well just be putting hurdles in the way of finding any peaceful settlement to the Abyei Problem, for this is a regime that cannot exist without crisis. And as such they must create some.

As for the Messeiriya Arab nomads, dividing Abyei between the Sudan and South Sudan will only leave them with the northern part of the territory which is already witnessing desertification at the most unprecedented pace. They are aware that such a hasty policy will later on backfire when the real future of grazing lies deep in the South Sudan hinterland. Again, they also understand too well that the Ngok Dinka are no longer ready to surrender more land to them.

In fact when it comes to the politics of Southern Kordofan and Southern Darfur, it can be seen that Khartoum is literally walking on a tight but thin rope. The Baggara tribes of the Rezeigat and their cousins (though often fighting one another) the Messeiriya, are a group of people that can easily change loyalties whenever their local interests are threatened.

It is actually an open secret that there are many Rezeigat and Messeiriya recruits in the ranks and files of the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), the Sudan Liberation Movement (Minni Minnawi and Abdel Wahid el Nur factions) as well as the Sudan People Liberation Movement/North (SPLA-N) rebel groups which are battling the NCP led government in Khartoum.

It seems that as Khartoum is afraid of the UN Security Council (UNSC) Chapter Seven on its head it is also worried about the fluid position of the Baggara tribes of Southern Darfur and Southern Kordofan. This is clearly demonstrated by the way that the NCP is easily forced to sign agreements with either the government of the neighboring Republic of South Sudan on issues of borders and Abyei on one hand or reach settlements with the SPLM-N as it happened in Addis Ababa (Malik Agar/Nafie Ali Nafie Agreement), but only to return home and renege on it in order to please its Baggara constituency.

The SPLM led government in Juba is no better either. For when the SPLM delegation to the Abyei PCA in The Hague failed to defend the South Sudans territorial right over Panthou/Heglig, the delegation and in fact the whole government came under intense fire from the grassroots. The people of Pariang did not especially take it well as they saw in it what they interpreted as an attempt by the government in Juba to trade Panthou in return for Abyei. These are sentiments of course, but they are real and deserve addressing.

Again there was the Abyei war, and then followed by the Panthou/Heglig war. How these wars begun and how they both ended remain an issue of huge controversial arguments amongst the South Sudanese people. This is even more so amongst the communities in the areas in question.

What is common between the two unfriendly neighbors (South Sudan & Sudan) in spite of the recently signed so-called comprehensive nine protocol cooperation agreement (better known as the September Agreement to remind people of the infamous September Laws of Neimeri), is that both countries are run by two totalitarian regimes.

This has been eloquently described by none but the outspoken opposition politician Dr. Lam Akol Ajawin, leader of the Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement /Democratic Change (SPLM-DC), in one of his writings, when he said: *during the CPA interim period the Sudan was a one country with two systems, however following the 9th July 2011 independence of South Sudan from Sudan, we now have two countries with one system.*

Both the Khartoum NCP and Juba SPLM are notoriously known for presenting their views in the international fora or even reaching internationally binding agreements without consulting with their grassroots. And as such each and every agreement they sign in the name of their people are often rejected at home.

While the Agar/Nafie Addis Ababa Agreement represents an example of how things can go wrong in the Sudan, the recent inclusion of the Mile 14 Area in the demilitarized zone between the two countries and the loss of Panthou/Heglig during the Abyei PCA settlement are the South Sudans equivalents.

Nonetheless both ruling parties (SPLM & NCP) continue to struggle with how to appease their supporters in the disputed areas coupled with the buying of loyalties whenever a controversial deal is struck. As for Khartoum it is well known for not only dragging its feet when it comes to the implementation of agreements, but it even reneged the whole truce all together.

However, sooner than later some of these irresponsible behaviors are likely to do away with whatever little credibility is left for these political organisations. They can as well create a new tension in the already strained relation with the international community.

It only suffices here to say that any attempt by Khartoum to appease the Messeiriya warlords by blocking the Abyei Referendum, in the face of what is an unanimous decision by the AUPSC will definitely expose the regime to the wrath of the international community.

On the other hand Juba may face a similar fate should it attempt to stroll an extra mile trying to appease General Paul Malong Awan, Governor of Northern Bahr Ghazal State, as he and his people stand opposed to the inclusion of Mile 14 Area in the demilitarized zone.

The bottom line is that there will definitely be an inevitable cost should any of the two governments subscribe to satisfy the local leaders in either the Mile 14 Area or Abyei at the expense of the AUPSC brokered truce. And this must be clear!

(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and not of the website.)

Author: Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba. Secretary General United South Sudan Party (USSP). He can be reached at: justinramba@aol.co.uk or justinramba@doctors.net.uk