Category: Uncategorized

People of Ruweng: The victims of power & appeasement policy

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, Kampala, Uganda, MAR/29/2017, SSN;

Ruweng State deserved good governance, therefore he should be reaffirmed. However, I was terribly shocked and disappointed to find out that Theja had been sacked from the post of Governorship.

The action of the president removing the governor of Ruweng State has confused me and I have lost all hopes that I had previously for any little reforms in South Sudan. It appears that President Kiir is an anti: reformation and good governance.

In fact, any true peoples’ government and president would have not even imagined of sacking Governor like Theja Da Adwad Deng. This is because Theja was a governor of the people.

I have been wondering since I received the news trying to term with the fact of his removal. But what crime has he committed? Is it because he has shown to be a good administrator or what is the problem?

The sacking of Governor of Ruweng State leaves more questions than answers. Some of the questions are those I have asked in the above paragraph and also some are: what does the President want? Who is running the office of the President? Does the President think before issuing the decree or does he just issue all decrees like animated object?

What was the main purpose for liberating South Sudan? Were South Sudanese liberated so that the SPLM use them as project for getting resources?

The above questions and others that you may add are the ones lingering in everyone’s one mind in South Sudan when the President acts unreasonably like what he has done in the case of Ruweng State.

A normal president could not remove a person like Theji in Ruweng State unless there is a hidden agenda. It appears that the President does not care about the welfare of citizens of South Sudan.

In addition, the SPLM as a party is dead politically because the President who is the head of the party is not interested in the future of the SPLM. What is the future of the SPLM? Like all other parties, future of the SPLM is the people and good leaders.

However, I doubt whether the SPLM values citizens and good youth who will be good leaders in future. If SPLM cared about good leaders and people, the President would have not removed Theji from the Governorship of Ruweng and also disobeyed the will of the people of Ruweng.

This is because Theja Da Adwad Deng is one of the people a party like SPLM would have brought up with the aim of preparing him for bigger post even the Presidency because little time Theja Da Adwad Deng spent in Ruweng proved that he would have been John Magufuli of South Sudan in future.

However, the President does not care about the future of South Sudan and her people this is because he never takes time to study the character of the people and also think about the future of the country.

A person who thinks about tomorrow and also thinks about the welfare of others is the leader for tomorrow. Nonetheless, where a person lives for today only he or she will always think for what is good for him or her based on today. In the same way, the only concern of that person is power and how to retain it.

In fact, the president of South Sudan is the type of the person I have just described above. This is because he is using anything to ensure that he remains in power even if it means sacrificing the citizens of South Sudan, which he has already done. As many as over 50,000 have died in the three-year conflict of South Sudan just because of power.

As seen above, south Sudanese are sold as they are being killed on daily basis just because they are made to kill each other in defense of power of one person who does not even care about their welfare.

Hence, it is not surprising to see the President removing the Governor of Ruweng State. This is because he wants to appease the Taban Deng Gai at the expense of the people of Ruweng State who have become the victims of power and appeasement policy of the president.

The removal was done just to appease Taban not the fake reason given that the removal was done to ensure the power sharing deal stipulated in the peace 2015. The government and Taban should not continue to hold people hostage with lies that there is still peace agreement: no peace in South Sudan.

If there is peace, then why did the rebels still capture Kajo-Keji on March 27, 2017 as it was reported by Sudantribune? Again, if there is Peace, why did the Sudantribune report that the AU on March 27, 2017 said that “the President, Salva Kiir, has accepted to declare a unilateral ceasefire?” Why do we need cease-fire if there is no war and who are fighting who and who controls those rebels”?

The fact is that there is no peace in South Sudan and government should not continue relying on Taban Deng because he does not have control over rebels in the bush. If he insists that he is the leader of the SPLM/A-IO, then he must be ordered them to stop his rebels from fighting. I doubt whether he has any influence over rebels and power to stop them.

My overall assessment is that there is no capable government in South Sudan. The Government which is there is the government for power in Juba not for people in Rural areas of South Sudan.

Hence, the people of Ruweng should know that there is no government in South Sudan because things have fallen apart and it is upon them to be prepared and protect themselves against Taban in case Taban uses the just appointed governor to their disadvantage.

Besides, the people of South Sudan should be prepared for two options either they will get finished defending the presidency of president Kiir not of South Sudan or they have to come out and tell Kiir that it is the time for him to go and a new leader who is capable comes in.

In summary, what I would like to tell the people of Ruweng State is that with the appointment of the new governor who will be controlled by Taban, they should be prepared for the worse because no one is sure about him. But there is a likelihood that he will not serve the people of Ruweng as if he will do that he will not be a fire to Taban unless he will dance to his tone.

NB// the author is South Sudanese human lawyer and can be reached through: juoldaniel@yahoo.com;+256783579256

The Devil’s Advocate: Rebels in South Sudan can win militarily

BY: Samuel Atabi, South Sudan, MAR/28/2017, SSN;

Several diplomats and key experts have one view of the civil war raging in South Sudan: No side can win the war by military means. For a young rebel recruit, this can be a devastating statement, for in taking up arms, he believes he can remove the dictatorship that is causing, in hundreds of thousands, the death, rape, displacement and suffering of South Sudanese.

A close examination of the statement, however, reveals that it is actually shorthand for a much longer one which says something like: “You South Sudanese do not have the requisite quantity and quality of armaments for a knock-out victory for one side or the other.”

True, there is parity, at least in doctrine and skills on both the rebel and government forces; after all, all of them are products of the same SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army).

Stalemated outcomes from battlefields of the war that started in 2013, attest to this conclusion.

But the question that needs to be answered is this: “Is it always true that African rebels, fighting against an unjust government, cannot win outright militarily?”

As a Devil’s Advocate, in this instance, my answer to this question should be a resounding “NO.”

Recent history of civil wars in the region is replete with spectacular military victories against sitting, arguably, dictatorial governments. As a raft of testimonies below will show that these victories came about because the various insurgents did receive generous military support from foreign allies or sympathizers.

To avoid a convoluted recounting of these testimonies in a report format, I would rather animate the very leaders of these victorious insurgents to speak for themselves. These testimonies are based on historical facts.

I call upon President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni (YKM) of the Republic of Uganda as the first witness.

YKM: “In 1981, a fascist government of Uganda, led by Milton Obote, rigged and stole a general election in which my party was poised to win. We did not take this insult lying down. I, together with others moved to the bush to start an armed struggle.

In the bush we formed a coalition called the National Resistance Movement (NRM), with its military wing named the National Resistance Army. I will spare you a lot of details.

But in five years we fought fierce battles against the government troops (the UNLA) and won. In 1986, in a final battle of Kampala, we comprehensively defeated the fascist army who retreated to the north of the country.

After forming the government, we pursued the remnants of this army, killed many of them but spared those who surrendered.

The only persistent group from this old army was the LRA (the so-called Lord’s Resistance Army), which, as I speak, we have reduced to just a dozen or so soldiers and are now hiding far away from Uganda, probably in Central African Republic.

It was not easy though. The White people (Museveni routinely utters this phrase) refused to give us arms. But my late friend, Col. Muamar Gaddafi of Libya came to our aid. We were able to arm ourselves sufficiently to face the government in Kampala.

If you have time, I can also add that we trained and armed the Rwandan Patriotic Front of Paul Kagame and others. These guys later returned to their country, Rwanda, to defeat another tribal and fascist regime there and form a government.

These two stories were straight military victories. I do not accept any crap that insurgents cannot, a priori, defeat an unpopular sitting government.”

Our next witness is Mr Meles Zanawi (RIP), Past President of Federal Republic of Ethiopia to give an account (from wherever he is) of insurgent’s victory in that ancient African country.

MZ: “We founded the Tigrean People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) around 1974. We were encouraged in this by our erstwhile comrades in the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF).

By that time, the EPLF had fought for over thirty years against the government of, first, Emperor Haile Selassie and, later, against that of Col. Mengistu Haile Mariam, without success.

After studying the war situation intently, we in TPLF decided to broaden our appeal to other Ethiopian ethnic groups and formed a coalition with a multi-ethnic movement called Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF, a mouthful).

The three fronts, EPLF, TPLF and EPRDF, together mounted a decisive military campaign in the early 1990’s against Mengistu. Finally, in May 1991, the long and arduous stalemate in the war against the regime was broken.

As we were approaching Addis Ababa to wrench the power from the oppressive government, Mengistu, himself, fled the country. The date was 21 May 1991. The rest, as they say, is history.

But let me say this in conclusion: the Eritreans were able to gain their independence through this direct military defeat of the Mengistu’s regime; it was not a negotiated settlement. The same can be said of our assumption of power.

We were decisive in our victory because of arms supplies which our allies and friends gave us. These creative and deeply caring allies and friends must remain unnamed for the time being. Yes, insurgent can defeat an uncaring government through military means.”

Because of the limitation of space and time, I will not bother you with further witness testimonies. But from the stories given above, it is now abundantly clear that, insurgents, given certain circumstances and arms, can indeed achieve military victory over their governmental opponents.

Despite all these glowing testimonies, it is still important to ask whether the rebel organizations in South Sudan (now believe to be over 40) can defeat the Kiir’s tribal autocracy in Juba.

For an answer to this question, we now call upon Dr Riek Machar of the SPLA-in opposition (SPLA-IO) to give a justification why the rebels deserve military support in order to succeed like his Ugandan and Ethiopian counterparts.

RM: “I will not detain you with minutiae of the war since its eruption in 2013. But I can say this: the SPLA-IO composition, aims and strategy are constantly being reviewed in the light of lessons learnt following the violence of July 2016.

Although the number of the rebel movements is now reported to be over 40, the reality is that all of them, except very few, are aligned with SPLA-IO. Even the few ones are welcome to join us. This alignment makes our command structure and control very manageable.

In addition, politically, as some organizations such as the International Crisis Group have acknowledged, the SPLA-IO is now a truly multi-ethnic army. Our forces are now widely spread throughout South Sudan: from Equatoria, Western Bahr el Ghazal, Jonglei, and Upper Nile to Unity states.

In all, we represent all the 64 tribes of South Sudan. This contrasts sharply with the SPLA-in government (SPLA-IG) which has become a mono-ethnic monolith that is led by a President controlled by self-appointed, reactionary and tribal Jieng Council of Elders (JCE).

Our aim is anchored on peaceful resolution of the conflict through the August 2015 peace agreement. Our war effort is defensive and ultimately aimed at bringing the government in Juba to a negotiating table.

From the media reports, the government has set its face against any peaceful dialogue that will include the opposition. Yet, in the meantime the SPLA-IG continues to kill civilians in thousands, rape them in thousands and send them into refuge and internal displacement by the millions.

Furthermore, reports of the government concluding military alliances against our forces are increasing on daily basis. In the face of this intransigence, on the part of the government, what are we in the opposition to do?

We believe that the people of South Sudan are entitled to self-defense against the brutal Kiir regime in Juba. That is why we now appeal to all peace loving governments and people to support us with arms to resist and eventually force the government to the negotiating table.

We need field guns, assault rifles, heavy and light machine guns, rockets, anti-tanks, shoulder-held anti-aircrafts and others. Yes, we need the famous Stinger anti-aircraft missiles for defense against the mercenary-operated Juba regime’s aircraft and helicopter gunships. (We understand the unease of supplying the Stingers to rebel forces such as the Afghan anti-Soviet forces that later passed them on to the Al Qaeda for use against the US forces . We are not terrorists neither are we anti-Americans).

Additional to our self-defense needs, the military hardware will assist us to degrade the forces of Juba with their allies should there be a need for prior military action before an international force or any interim trustee government is deployed or installed in Juba. (We are open to persuasion about these issues).

UNMISS, the UN forces in South Sudan, are reluctant to engage militarily with the SPLA-IG despite their wide-ranging and robust mandate.

I will conclude by reminding the international community that, in the past, appeasement of a determined genocidal regime such as that of Hitler’s had led to the death of millions of Europeans and Jews.

Kiir’s regime is equally determined and genocidal. To avoid a similar fate for our people, the removal of the regime requires the use of military means.

Like Churchill’s appeal to the Americans during the Second World War, we in South Sudan ask you to “give us the tools and we will do the fighting”. You know where to get me and I will be waiting for your call.

Samuel Atabi is the Devil’s Advocate; all the words are his and can be reached at samuelatabi@gmail.com

National Salvation (NAS), United Kingdom, of Gen. Cirillo rejects Jieng’s letter defaming Cirillo

National Salvation Front (NAS) United Kingdom
Date: 26th March 2017;

Response to JCE’s press release of 21st March 2017 in respect of General Thomas Cirilo Swaka

The JCE’s letter strives to depict General Thomas Cirilo Swaka and the Equatorians as enemies of Jieng and Nuer. In this false portrayal of General Swaka, the aim is to divide South Sudanese against one another.

This baseless claim that Equatorians wish to be annexed to Uganda or secede from South Sudan as an independent country is a ploy to delegitimize Equatorians as South Sudanese.

National Salvation Front is a movement championing the cause of all South Sudanese to rid the country of the current tribal system in Juba.

In paragraph 2 of the JCE’s letter, General Swaka is quoted out of context as he clearly referred to the incident of violence in July 2016, and not the power struggle that sparked the conflict in December 2013. Please see paragraph 2 of General Swaka’s resignation letter in its entirety.

The JCE argues that it has no violent agenda but that, “it is Thomas Cirilo himself who has done everything with his tribal death squads to target innocent Jieng on the Equatorian roads and towns.” This is not true.

The evidence of JCE’s violent agenda can be seen in their letters to the international community: ‘The Position of the JCE on the IGAD-Plus proposed compromise agreement’ (file:///C:/Users/Rosemary/Downloads/JCE%20-%20Position%20on%20Proposed%20Compromise%20Agreement%20(1).pdf) and ‘Jieng Council of Elders rejects imposition of peace on South Sudan’ (https://paanluelwel.com/2015/04/01/jieng-council-of-elders-rejects-imposition-of-peace-on-south-sudan/) and also the Obassanjo report: African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan.

As with regards to General Swaka being a leader of a “tribal death squad”, this is nothing other than a deliberate smear campaign to tarnish the image of General Swaka.

It is worth mentioning that General Swaka graduated from the Military College in Khartoum in 1984, that is nearly 2 years following the division of South Sudan into 3 regions of Bahr El Ghazal, Upper Nile and Equatoria by the then President Jaafar Mohamad Niemeri.

This division of the Southern Sudan resulted into the Jieng and the Nuer going to their respective regions. By the time General Swaka graduated from the military college and returned to Juba, arguably 99 percent of the Jieng and the Nuer had gone to their respective regions.

The crucial question then is: which Jieng and Nuer did General Swaka kill?

“The infamous White House” in Juba referred to by the JCE was created by President Omer El Bashir’s regime which came to power on 30th June 1989. The so called “White House” actually was the USAID office in Juba which the government took over and converted into a security office.

The name reflects the colour of the paint of the house. By this time literally there were no Jieng and Nuer in Juba save members of the security forces. Equally, there were no Equatorians in the other two regions as they had to return home. So what is the JCE talking about here?

General Swaka’s rebellion from the Sudanese army and his subsequent joining of the SPLM/A follows the massacre of Equatorian army officers, police officers, prison wardens, wild life officers and intellectuals by the Bashir regime in 1992.

Now if General Swaka were a Jieng hater, why would he have joined an organisation (SPLA/M) whose leader was a Jieng and dominated by the Jieng?

The JCE shamelessly claim that, “[m]ore importantly, the Jieng people possess the largest land mass in South Sudan and they are not in the business of territorial expansion. And so to suggest that The JCE has an agenda for forceful displacement of people from their ancestral lands is again a cheap lie by the general to win sympathy. The idea of tribal territorial expansion ended in the nineteenth century and the general must learn how to properly package his lies.”

This is rich coming from the JCE. When president Kiir issued a decree (Decree Establishment order 36/2015 in October 2015) the JCE was the first to jubilantly congratulate the president for this instrument of land theft from other tribes.

This decree annexed lands from the Chollo, Nuer and Fertit people to the benefit of the Jieng.

Furthermore the naming of places in non-Jieng territories by the Jieng using Jieng names is a attempt to psychologically lay claim of the area. For example Korok Hill in Juba the Jieng have named it ‘Jebel Dinka’, another example is the fact that the Jieng now call Nimule ‘Bor 2’.

If this is not evidence of territorial expansion endorsed by the JCE, why in their alleged civil capacity do they not speak out against it? Given this evidence, how can General Swaka be lying?

In relation to JCE’s claim made in paragraph 10 (last paragraph of page 3), the JCE claims that they have implemented the policy of affirmative action.

Aside from the patronising implications of that claim, please can the JCE provide evidence of this alleged policy which would be demonstrated by proportional representation of all the tribes and the regions in both the army and the government?

Paragraph 11 of the JCE’s letter states: “Another point worth responding to is point 10 of the letter which General Cirilo claimed that the JCE sits in military command meetings and that it gives directives to the military.

This is obviously a very cheap and baseless attack. The SPLA is a military organisation managing a civil war, so a civil body like the JCE has neither the knowledge nor the mandate to give instructions to military professionals.

What is clear is that General Cirilo is full of hate against the Jieng people and his wild claims against the JCE are simply his attempt to hide his hatred and his desire to tarnish the image of the Jieng people.”

The JCE is full of contradictions. Their claim that they are a civil body is utter nonsense. Their letter which we are responding to in itself is evidence that the JCE is not a civil society group because this letter without any doubt is advancing a political end.

Again their letters to the international community and their deadly involvement in the events leading to the cleansing of the Nuer in December 2013 reported in the Obassanjo report speak for itself.

Furthermore, what civic functions does the JCE perform?

For the JCE to deny their participation in military affairs of the Republic of South Sudan is beyond belief. As mentioned earlier, the Obassanjo report into the crisis in South Sudan clearly evidences the fact that the JCE is heavily involved in military affairs of the country.

The fact that they converted the army into Jieng militia cannot be denied and there is no way they can hide it. What kind of a national army would use the Jieng language as its operating language? Especially when Jieng is not the national language of the country, please see the evidence in this YouTube link, ‘The Mighty SPLA (Tiger Division)’ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSQDSn3eaBo)

In paragraph 13 of JCE’s letter (paragraph 4 of page 4), the JCE intends to distort the land grab attempts of General Swaka’s ancestral land by members of the Jieng. Please see ‘Confronting the Jieng policy of land grab in South Sudan.’(https://pachodo.org/latest-news-articles/pachodo-english-articles/12156-confronting-the-policy-of-land-grab-in-south-sudan)

What the JCE is doing by their insinuations here is projecting their own behaviour onto the general.

In regards to paragraph 14 of JCE’s letter (paragraph 5 of page 4), the people of South Sudan have been victimised, abused and disempowered by the Jieng dominated government. The logical and natural result of such treatment is scepticism and resentment.

The JCE seeks to trivialise these natural sentiments by dismissing and projecting them as tribalism onto other non Jieng people. This is a dangerous policy because the JCE is living in denial of other communities pains.

Should the JCE continue to peddle this dismissive argument, the other communities may retaliate against the Jieng because the Jieng would not have had the time to reflect and change the behaviour that is alienating them from other South Sudanese communities. Please see, ‘The storm of change gathering to sweep Kiir and the JCE from power.’ (http://www.southsudannation.com/the-storm-of-change-gathering-to-sweep-kiir-and-jce-from-power/)

The attempted character assassination of General Swaka by the JCE is a clear example of the extent to which the JCE will go to discredit a credible opposition leader who has fought tirelessly for the liberation of South Sudan.

The lies fabricated about General Swaka being a foreign agent, corrupt, money embezzler and ‘a weak charactered man’ without any truth in it is intended to destroy General Swaka. We cannot be angry with the JCE for this letter because it is proof that they are clutching at straws to defeat a formidable opponent.

In conclusion, JCE’s ugly role in the destabilisation and destruction of South Sudan with its tribal agenda is openly known to every South Sudanese including children.

Their attempt to rebrand themselves as a civil society group, pursuing peace in the country in order to rebut General Thomas Cirilo Swaka’s evidenced assertion in his resignation letter, will not pull the wool over the eyes of the people of South Sudan.

Signed
NSF (NAS) UK

Lack of ideology, moral politics & the rule of law: Causes of South Sudan problems

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, Lawyer, Kampala, Uganda, MAR/26/2017, SSN;

Six years ago, South Sudanese overwhelmingly voted for separation from Sudan after over forty years of struggle for independence. Thus, independence made South Sudan become a sovereign state.

In that regard, when we talk of State sovereignty we mean the State responsibility and because of that responsibility the state has a primary duty to protect its citizens, which lies with the state itself (see; The Report of the International Commission on Responsibility of States to protect and Intervention and State Sovereignty December 2001)

Sadly six years down the road, South Sudan has lost the direction as it has fallen into some kind of a military dictatorship (though it is not a typical military government) that retains power through the use of political violence, kidnappings and other oppressive tactics.

These tactics are used solely to protect and maintain the interest of the cliques that have held the government and the president hostage in order to continue sacking the blood of South Sudanese amidst ruthless and aimless war.

Thus, South Sudanese are now trapped in war, famine and potential genocide though the beneficiaries of the war do not like to hear the word “genocide”.

In that respect, the recent report on South Sudan’s war, famine and potential genocide by the Enough Project entitled “How The World’s Newest Country Went Awry: South Sudan’s war, famine and potential genocide,” properly summarizes the State of South Sudan as a “den of thieves,” in which battles by profiteers over power and the corrupt spoils of power, including an “oil-fueled gravy train,” have fueled endless cycles of conflict.

In addition, the same report of Enough Project cited above pointed out that the current war is the cause the famine due to the war and political violence, which is likely to result into genocide.

This is because as report puts it, “The competing kleptocratic factions are fighting over a lucrative prize: control of the state, which in turn brings control over oil and other natural resource revenues, patronage networks, some foreign aid, massive corruption opportunities, immunity from prosecution and accountability, control over the army and other security organs, the ability to control or manipulate banks and foreign exchange, the opportunity to manipulate government contracts, and the chance to dominate the commercial sector”.

Looking at the report cited above which explains the problems of war, famine and likelihood of genocide facing the country currently, the immediate question that comes in mind is: what is the problem or what causes all these problems in South Sudan?

The simple answer is that all the problems facing South Sudan now have their genesis in the lack of ideology, moral politics and the rule of law.

Thus, where the country is run on proper ideology guided by the interest of the state and citizens, then a true, moral or proper politics develops. The true or moral politics is the politics that puts the nation interest above individuals.

Hence, where there is a conflict between individual personal political preference and that of a country itself, then those individuals who have political ideology different from the state are supposed to resign from the politics. This is the basis for which some politicians resign or are forced to resign from politics or from the government.

As pointed out above, moral politics is supposed to guide the nation towards achieving the interest of the people which was supposed to have been the case in South Sudan. Nonetheless, in South Sudan as we see today, there is lack of ideology which has resulted into the lack of proper or moral politics and absence of the rule of law as the three are interrelated. How the three are interrelated shall be explained later in this work.

But the lack of ideology in South Sudan is the cause of ill-conceived and bad politics. Hence, politics in South Sudan is mixed with personal interest and because of that the government, political party and politicians are inseparable, which complicates the issues of governance in South Sudan.

In other words, due to the misconception of politics which is perceived as personal, the Government of South Sudan is run on patron-clientelism. This is ‘a patronage network that binds both patron and client together in a system of exchange in which the relationship is mutually beneficial but at the same time the power, control and authority lie with patron (see; peace and Conflict in Africa edited by David J. Francis p.10)’

In relation to the above paragraph and in relation to South Sudan, politics is based on patron-client relationship, which is replicated at different levels, including local, national and international, and between individuals, groups, communities and states. This is seen in Juba and in various states in South Sudan, which is a mode of governance.

This mode of governance though it is bad it is not easy to eradicate as they feed into and support each other.

The type of politics discussed above comes about due to the lack of political ideology. Lack of political ideology causes messy or bad politics characterized by the systems of governance, which involve the exercise of political authority based on an individual wishes, which is further used to serve the private and vested interests of the state power-holders, including the ruling and governing elites.

Hence, in such a state of affairs, the state resources are used for personal benefits and in oppression of the citizens to protect personal interests by authorities.

In the kind of system, as cited the above paragraph, the State governing institutions are appropriated, used, subverted, privatized, informalized and subordinated to the interests of the personalized ruler, the regime in power and its supporters as seen under the SPLM Government headed by President Kiir in South Sudan.

Therefore, in the country where the system as described above is adopted, there is no always a distinction between the public and the private sphere of governance and the political ascendancy as well as individual preferment is based on loyalty to the power holder.

Hence, the power-holder such as the president emerges not only as a personalized ruler and the prime purveyor of patrimonial resources (public resources) but also commands monopoly over all formal political activity, whereby the formal state and governmental institutions are subordinated to the ruler’s vested and strategic interests.

In truth, the state where the ruler personalizes the system, there are always organized criminal activities in the form of informalization and privatization of state governing institutions in which large scale of corruptions and fraud are legalized or carried with impunity against the citizens.

Innocent citizens who protest against bad governance or corruption as referred to above become criminals while the true criminals such as government officials who steal government resources perceive themselves innocent and prosecuted.

So, they end up organizing criminal activities sanctioned under the state laws and enforced by the State security apparatuses that go around tracking down patriotic citizens who complain against the misuse of state resources and power.

In addition, when they feel threaten and see the threat against their power, they form private militias and also privatize civil war that helps them remain in power in the pretext of protecting national interest, and consequently, there is a growth in an economy of plunder, and the ‘re-traditionalization of society’ through the use of witchcraft and occult practice in governance as seen in various government institutions in South Sudan.

The emergency and existence of the problems in South Sudan as discussed above are due to the lack of strong political ideology and the rule of law that should have guided South Sudanese leaders to lead the country to the desired direction in its development.

As mentioned above, the rule of law in simple language means the supremacy of the law. In other words, it refers to the situation where the authorities base their administrative decisions on law and everything done by the authorities must be done in accordance with the principles of law in their areas of administration and which must be in line with the Constitution.

Thus, ideology, politics and the rule of law are intertwined or closely connected. This is because where one of them is weak then the other two are weakened or become ineffective and by implication, citizens become the victims of bad governance.

In this respect, bad governance is the product of the absence of law or the rule of law. Where there is no law, there is always uncertainty and uncertainty creates anxiety among the citizens and where the citizens always experience anxiety caused by uncertainty in the governance, the citizens lose confidence in their leaders and hence politics experiences mayhem and eventual political crisis as seen in South Sudan.

Due to the lack ideology in South Sudan, there is no true or politics guided by morals and because of that the law has become an enemy to the leaders. The overall consequence of the absence of law in South Sudan is the outbreak of civil war and famine which have created a hell for South Sudan’s people. But at the same time it has created bloody and lucrative businesses for the country’s leaders and other commercial collaborators, i.e. South Sudan’s war profiteers” to the use the language of Enough Project Report.

Moreover, the absence of the rule of law caused by lack of ideology and lack of true politics has made the war crimes a source of income for South Sudanese warlords or leaders as it pays.

This is because there is no accountability for the atrocities and looting of state resources that has resulted into the current famine and starvation facing the nation.

As you read this article, thousands of South Sudanese are imminent danger of starvation caused by corruption within the system as it is the system itself, which is corrupt and which is the very purpose of the state of South Sudan.

In South Sudan, as the Enough Project found, the leading accelerator of the conflict is greed-fueled by kleptocracy in which state institutions have been hijacked by a network of individuals who are working hard to rich themselves at the expense of masses.

This group or network of people is composed of leaders and their commercial collaborators internally and internationally, backed by the use of extreme violence.

As a matter of fact, the network is composed of leading government officials, generals, businessmen, foreign investors, banks, oil and mining company representatives, money transfer entities, and others connected to the international financial system. The automatic result as expected is the disempowerment and destruction of the viability of the state institutions that are supposed to hold leaders accountable.

This is because all the parties involved want to avoid both accountability and transparency and then the National Security apparatuses comes in to brutally suppress all forms of dissent and independent expression or political activity against the corrupt leaders.

Besides the above, the insecurity experienced by corrupt politicians makes them not have confidence in national security and because of that they begin recruiting ethnic-based militias and armed to attack the communities perceived to be opponents to political leaders and their political mischief.

Of course, there is need for fairness here, the use of militias goes back to the time of the British colonial and Khartoum regimes era, when identities were politicized, just as the Belgians did in colonial Rwanda, establishing ‘tribal authorities.

However, that does not absolve the government of South Sudan as it has a primary duty to transform the society.

As pointed out above, tribal groups are recruited and dressed in the national army uniform to send the message that they are members of national army while other citizens join rebellion not because they want regime change and promote national ideology and the rule of law but they want to eliminate one ethnic group in the country.

Consequently, soldiers in the government and rebels in the bush are killed without accountability in the process of defending the national government without national agenda and rebels are killed in defense of their tribal interests threatened by the interests of the government officials. Hence, the country becomes divided and also a loser on both sides.

Sadly enough, after the soldiers or rebels have been killed in defense of the national government without national agenda or in defense of their tribal interests in the bush, no one among the leaders whether in the government or in the bush cares for the widows and children of those killed, so the war becomes most expensive and demanding venture.

Since there is no one who cares for the children and widows for those fallen soldiers, majority of the members of the army have lost patriotism and becomes mercenaries hence the army becomes a bunch of undisciplined group of individuals.

In summary, it is important to point out that due to the lack of ideology, proper or moral politics and the rule of law, the SPLM government has lost the objectives of which they SPLM of 1983-2005 was founded on.

Because of that, if the SPLM/A of 1983-2005 were to meet face to face with the SPLM of 2017, they will shoot at each other because the SPLM of 1983-2005 will think that we are still under the Sudan rule.

The SPLM of 2017 is ideologically corrupt and seriously dictatorial which has put it in terrible mess and this means that there is a need for radical change in the SPLM political structure.

There is a need for honesty to tell the leadership of the SPLM that the party is now in bad shape or political intensive care unit and because of that there is a need for restructuring of the SPLM in order for it to survive.

In addition, President Kiir should be informed that what he is told by the cliques around him in the State house is different from what is on the ground. The President should know that whereas he has weakened the rebels, he has completely lost control over the security of the country and citizens are in grave danger of death.

The president must also know that for South Sudan to be saved from falling apart there is a need for compromise. To compromise is part of ideology strategy because where there is ideology leaders are ready to compromise in order to agree on the ideological framework and development.

Finally, this article has a suggestion that the president does not want to hear but for the sake of South Sudan, the article points out and suggests that the President is no longer capable of leading the country and there is a need for him to prepare a strong person within the party that can save the SPLM from natural death or disappearance from the political scene.

If the President does not listen to this advice, he must prepare for the collapse of the country and if the country collapses and citizens get finished, then what was the purpose of liberating South Sudan and the South Sudanese?

NB//: the author is South Sudanese Human Rights lawyer, a graduate from Makerere University, School of law and can be reached through: juoldaniel@yahoo.com/+256783579256

Vice-pres. Taban Deng Gai’s Abusing Power & Taking Advantage of little guys for selfish goals

BY: Santino Aniek, New York, USA, MAR/26/2017, SSN;

Taban Deng Gai’s long career of abusing power for an endless goal and taking advantage of little guys did not just started but since he observed power in the 1980’s. Those who know Taban, in which myself is included, would agree that this long career of abusing power and taking advantage of little guys did not just start overnight but since when Taban was Itang’s administrator during the liberation war.

In fact, the majority of the South Sudanese are aware of the grimy details of Taban’s infamously governing when he became the Governor of Unity State. As one might expect, Taban claims to represent the interests of the citizenry of this country, as he became the Vice President of South Sudan.

But his governing record reveals a man with a penchant for tyrannizing the little guy and abusing power for his endless goal.

In today’s clannish politics, Ruweng people do not doubt that Taban will do everything he can to achieve his pathetic goal, but his pathetic objective including Wath Danluel, will not be achieved during our generation’s time.

It is very important to bring to the public attention that the abuse of power and the marginalization of our people by Taban and his likes as much as we could so the people of this country would understand what we have been dealing with all these years.

Now, it seems blindingly obvious to me that the government of South Sudan need not only to offer a position to people like Taban, but different solutions to solve our chronic problems like resources and land to satisfy these people needs.

With that being said, T’m getting sick and tired of these people like Taban taking advantage of the little guy and do whatever it takes to achieve their goals.

Subsequently, we woke up Thursday morning, still grieving with an emptiness that, unfortunately Ruweng people have come to know far too well that Governor Theji Da Adwad Deng has resigned from his Party SPLM in Opposition due to the fact that Taban has started bullying him about the piece of land he occupied in Ruweng State since 2005.

Nevertheless, Ruweng people have woken up that morning wondering what will it take to end this ugly scourge of Taban’s marginalization and taking advantage of little guy all these years without jeopardizing the peace agreement.

However, marginalization and taking advantage of little guy in South Sudan is entrenched in the fabric of those who are faithful to the government and it has become a weapon used often by people like Taban to wear down their opponents.

More importantly, once we became pseudo-free, we no longer serve a purpose and so the time for action for Ruweng people is now if Taban attempts to replace Governor Adwad.

As a result, Ruweng people must come together and combat the marginalization and bullying of our people once and for all. As we are aware of the situation, we cannot remain silent because Taban will never ever stop until we act quickly.

People like Taban have to learn once and for all that every single human being is a human being like him and Nhialic (God) of Ruweng has given has us that land, which it cannot be taken away from us until all Ruweng people have stopped breathing.

Given the situation in South Sudan, it is true that marginalization has become a culture and it is just another form of colonization that has been used to marginalize communities across South Sudan.

People like Taban think that if marginalization is used wisely, it might actually work in a certain situation, but let me assure you all including Taban himself it will never work in Ruweng State. Incorporating marginalization into daily life is what has helped escalate senseless war in South Sudan few years ago.

And so how we get past this era and start to look at people as human beings instead of bunch something known to them, I cannot tell you, but what I can tell you is this, people like Taban cannot take advantage of our people because his boss Riek Machar has tried twice and failed.

Therefore, I have no idea how to change the way people take advantage of little guy, but surely, we will change the way Taban think soon if he is still advancing his pathetic agenda.

I will say having leaders in our country that have an attitude of revenge does not help anything, it is the Taban’s who will never help in the peace process.

Thoughtful as usual, we are certainly not without our own problems in Ruweng State, but so far, we have managed to stay reasonably civil with each other. While our people have, on rare occasion stepped over the line, for the most part conflicts are resolved peacefully and our people do a good job to live in peace with our neighbors.

It is disheartening as a Ruweng citizen, to see the turmoil that seems to pervade other parts of our country at the moment. While we have some important differences, we are much more alike than unlike and seeing this animosity among our people is troubling.

In fact, the problem we are dealing with is not just the politicians like Taban in Juba, but the real problem is the South Sudanese people who emotionally jump on bandwagons and fail to critically analyze the person they’re supporting like Taban.

It seems to me that most of Taban’s supporters are following him based solely on the fact that he is going to reward them with jobs in the government. His appeal is simply that he is perceived as a colorful individual that has commitment to anything life.

Yet, for most of his governing career, Taban has betrayed the very people from whom he is now trying to convince them to achieve his pathetic goal for him. His views appear more in line with those of Adolf Hitler of Germany.

Taban’s supporters purposely overlook his criminal records, dereliction of power, and unabashed pandering. It is well know that Taban’s views change with the political climate.

However, this is a fragment of a problem, but the problem is the people who are supporting him. They completely dismiss the lack of moral and ethical integrity displayed in Taban’s world.

These people supporting Taban are the same people who supported Riek Machar twice. We all know the history of South Sudan and the injustices and marginalization our people starting with the Ruweng people. Nevertheless, this is our country, our people in Ruweng State put their blood, sweat and tears to liberate this country and we have lost half of our population by fighting Khartoum regime.

Ultimately, part of this resignation is shocking because Taban is known for abusing power and bullying.

Finally, any attempt to remove Governor Theji Da Adwad Deng from the governorship post will allow our full operations to liberate ourselves from this too long mistreatment and to allow normality to return to the land of a peace-loving people.

Though I don’t agree to use the war to achieve the end goal, but war happens when people like ours are neglected and their grievances are being ignored all the time. Furthermore, these exercises are also a way of defending and liberating ourselves from this long suffering that will never expire until our people rise against this status quo.

As the fact indicates, we will give this peace a chance to materialize, but on the other hand, we will not take a break until our people are no longer worried about the threat of Taban in Ruweng part of the world.

More importantly, this is a reminder to all friends of Ruweng people, be informed that if Governor Adwad is being removed, we are capable to do the unthinkable and we will also be talking to anybody in the entire world including the number one enemy of South Sudan, Omer El Bashir, to help us to achieve our end goal.

It is not secret because we have been suffering for too long and we cannot leave this suffering and threat to our children. The entire people of South Sudan have no idea what the hell is going on in Ruweng State, it is good if people have a leader that cares about them, but our people in Ruweng State nowadays cannot seriously think they are completely under the care of this government where Taban is a Vice President.

There is probably a lot more to it, I’m not a politician, but repeating Pathou (Heglig, the oil-rich area taken over by Sudan), my birth place’s mistake will be a huge mistake to the entire South Sudanese people, because most of the resources in South Sudan are located in our local area and without hesitation we can at least make a deal with any body in the world including the enemy of South Sudan.

Let that be clear. Yes, marginalization is a hell of a lot more common across South Sudan than we like to admit because we are not allowed to report what is really happening in the country, and certainly, this pseudo gets a special award for his abuse of power on an endless goal and taking advantage of little guys must stop once and for all.

Santino Aniek is a concerned South Sudanese in Upstate New York, U.S.A. He can be reached at santino.aniek5@gmail.com and find me on Facebook, on Skype and on twitter @saniek.

No Ideology, No Nation: The problems of South Sudan

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, Lawyer, Kampala, Uganda,MAR/22/2017, SSN;

National building begins with ideological building. Without defining and identifying a proper ideology, the nation remains confused, corrupt and stranded. As defined, an ideology is a collection of beliefs held by an individual, group or society. It can also be described as a set of conscious and unconscious ideas which make up one’s beliefs, goals, expectations, and motivations.

In this regard, an ideology is a comprehensive normative vision that is followed by people, governments, or other groups that is considered the correct way by the majority of the population, as argued in several philosophical tendencies. Hence, as those of Karl Marx and Frederick Engel observed in their work, the ideology is set of ideas proposed by the dominant class of society such as the elite to be followed by all members of society.

In relation to politics, the ideology refers to the system of abstracted meaning applied to public matters, thus making it central to politics. Implicitly, in societies that distinguish between public and private life, every political or economic tendency entails ideology, whether or not it is propounded as an explicit system of thought.

In the Althusserian sense, Ideology is “the imaginary relation to the real conditions of existence.”

Where the nation does not have a clear ideology like South Sudan, the whole system becomes corrupt as there is no ideology that directs people on what to do, when to do it, where to do it, how to do it and why it should be done.

The role of leaders of a country run without ideology is not defined but it is geared at retaining power hence, all intellectual tendencies are corrupted when they consort with power. This is exactly what is happening in South Sudan today.

In South Sudan you get government and rebels fighting meaningless and aimless war. The people in the aimless war are viewed as objects. This is why women and girls are raped, young boys are recruited and leaders keep on buying guns with country’s resources even though people are facing dangerous hunger and starvation.

The recent report confirms the above statement that country resources are being used in purchasing weapons while people are starving in the country. Hence, the report pointed out that the government of South Sudan is spending its oil revenue on weapons, even as the country descends into a famine largely caused by Juba’s military operations, according to a confidential United Nations report.

Thus, the report by a panel of experts, whose findings were dismissed by South Sudan’s government, calls for an arms embargo on the country – a measure rejected by the Security Council during a vote in December 2016.

The report further pointed out that the experts found a “preponderance of evidence (that) shows continued procurement of weapons by the leadership in Juba” for the army, the security services, militias and other “associated forces.”

As stated in the above report, while hundreds of thousands (100,000) of people are facing starvation in various parts of South Sudan such as part of the former Unity State, the government of President Salva Kiir continued to make arms deals hence spending millions of dollars on arms.

The reason the government of South Sudan is seen as being inhuman which it is in reality is because it does not have the ideology. Where there is correct ideology for a country, the question is always, “What is a nation?” Such a question as this is always important because it guides the government in the nation building process.

When Dr. Garang was heading the Movement called SPLM/A, not like the one we have today, there was a clear ideology called the “New Sudan” built on clear ideology. Hence, New Sudan with its ideological leaning acted as a guide throughout the war from 1983 to 2005. It was the clear ideology of the Movement that made SPLM/A strong as there was a direction where people of Southern Sudan were going.

In addition, there was a law called the SPLM Manifesto of 1983 as revised in 2008, which made the liberated areas experience strong rule of law and strong army: the SPLA.

With the demise of Dr. Garang and the rise of General Kiir, South Sudan was buried alive as it was sacrificed on the altar of corruption. Therefore, the SPLA that used to be strong in the bush was weakened in towns, which made some of us long for those days when we were in the bush in which the rule of law use to exist and everybody felt at home.

In fact, the SPLM/A used to be strong in the bush because its leader, Dr. Garang, tried by all means to avoid being hated and despised at all costs by the rural people of Southern Sudan. As Niccolò Machiavelli in the Prince puts it, a leader (or a prince) may be criticized for a lack of virtue, but he will never be hated for it. However, a leader (Prince) will be hated if he takes the property or women of his subjects.

In other words, a leader must avoid robbing his subjects of their honor. The leader will be despised if he or she has a reputation for being fickle, frivolous, effeminate, cowardly, or irresolute.

Hence, if the leader is regarded highly by his subjects, he will be shielded from conspiracies and open attacks.

In South Sudan, the President has failed to control the situation due to the fact that he fears his officials whom he allows to rob citizens directly and indirectly of their resources. This is why the President has become unpopular because he allows the national resources to be unfairly shared through corruption.

All the above problems are facing South Sudan because of the lack of clear national ideology. As the Uganda President Yoweri Museveni observed over South Sudan in regard to lack of ideology recently, there is no national ideology on both sides of the rebels and the government as they are following what he termed as pseudo-ideology of sectarianism.

Museveni expressed the above view on South Sudan when he was meeting Xu Jinghu, the Chinese government Special Representative on African Affairs, at State House, Entebbe recently. He criticized the leadership of the different parties involved in the conflict saying the leadership is making the conflict a tribal affair.

He is quoted to have said, “The main problem in South Sudan is ideological. The groups there don’t have clear headed leaders to guide the people about their future. They push the pseudo-ideology of sectarianism of tribes and yet this is detrimental to the people’s well-being. The conflict cannot be resolved through force but by negotiations aimed at two things; first are elections. It is the medicine for sectarianism because in an election, no single tribe can marshal numbers to win.”

As seen above, the main problem of South Sudan is lack of ideology, which has left the country in a confused situation in which the rule of law has become an enemy to the state. People are being tortured directly and indirectly. People are being tortured indirectly as they are subjected to hunger and poverty because of grave corruption and they are being tortured directly by the National Security which is being used by the leadership to protect their interest not that of the nation.

The army has been allowed to be infiltrated by business people who are in form of generals and whose business is to corrupt everything and also oppress junior officers and other soldiers. Currently, no one cares for the family of the soldiers killed defending government or the nation.

To make the matters worse, the president and his group have turned the nation into personal enterprise in which they are using national resources for personal benefits and also to eliminate different South Sudanese who complain with the way the nation is being managed.

In summary, without ideology, no country and without ideology, no people, as people are exploited through corruption and daylight robbery promoted by confused state of affairs.

In order for South Sudan to come out from the current crises, there must be peace and then serious reforms in the army undertaken and the rule of law must be promoted and respected while strong ideology be adopted to guide the nation in its path to development where the justice, liberty and prosperity can be achieved by all South Sudanese.

NB//The author is human rights lawyer residing in Kampala Uganda, and can be reached through: juoldaniel@yahoo.com or +256783579256

Causes of South Sudan’s famine and potential genocide: A New Report

New Report Identifies Causes of South Sudan’s Famine and Potential Genocide

March 21, 2017;

In a new report published today, John Prendergast, Founding Director of the Enough Project, offers an historical review of corruption and profiteering in South Sudan, detailing how a legacy of violent kleptocratic leadership has led the world’s newest nation into a crisis of famine, war, and potential genocide.

The Enough Project report, “How The World’s Newest Country Went Awry: South Sudan’s war, famine and potential genocide” details the history of South Sudan, describing a “den of thieves,” in which battles by profiteers over power and the corrupt spoils of power, including an “oil-fueled gravy train,” have fueled endless cycles of conflict.

The current situation in Sudan is described as a violent, greed-fueled kleptocracy, in which institutions of accountability have been deliberately undermined, and calls for hard-target “follow the money” investigations into the looting of the nation. The report further provides a series of critical recommendations to address the root causes of famine, destabilization and war, and to dismantle the violent kleptocratic system that is driving the suffering of the South Sudanese people.

Selected report highlights:

“War has been hell for South Sudan’s people, but it has been very lucrative for the country’s leaders and commercial collaborators, South Sudan’s war profiteers.”

“In South Sudan today, war crimes pay. There is no accountability for the atrocities and looting of state resources, or for the famine that results.”

“Corruption isn’t an anomaly within the system; it is the system itself, the very purpose of the state.”

“Ethnicity has been used as the main mobilizer for organized violence.”

“The history of conflict and mass atrocities in Sudan and South Sudan is driven in large part by unchecked greed, manifesting itself primarily in the accumulation of wealth and power by the country’s leaders.”

“The competing kleptocratic factions are fighting over a lucrative prize: control of the state, which in turn brings control over oil and other natural resource revenues, patronage networks, some foreign aid, massive corruption opportunities, immunity from prosecution and accountability, control over the army and other security organs, the ability to control or manipulate banks and foreign exchange, the opportunity to manipulate government contracts, and the chance to dominate the commercial sector.”

“South Sudan is not wildly different here. The leading accelerator of most African conflict is greed-fueled kleptocracy in which state institutions have been hijacked for personal enrichment by a small group of leaders and their commercial collaborators internally and internationally, often using extreme violence. The networks are usually composed of leading government officials, generals, businessmen, foreign investors, banks, oil and mining company representatives, money transfer entities, and others connected to the international financial system. They disempower and destroy the viability of those state institutions because they want to avoid both accountability and transparency, and they brutally suppress all forms of dissent and independent expression or political activity.”

“In South Sudan (and Sudan), ethnic-based militias are recruited and armed to attack the communities perceived to be opponents. This practice goes back to the British colonial era, when identities were politicized, just as the Belgians did in colonial Rwanda, establishing ‘tribal authorities.'”
Key report recommendations:

“The missing ingredient in the international response is the creation of sufficient leverage or influence to shift the calculations of these violent kleptocrats from war to peace, from atrocities to human rights, from mass corruption to good governance. The surest way for the international community to build influence is to hit these “thieves of state” in their wallets.”

“What is needed is a hard-target search for the dirty money, the ill-gotten gains from the last decade of looting. Choking the illicit financial flows of the kleptocrats is the key point of leverage available to the international community, given the vulnerability of stolen assets that are offshored in neighboring countries or around the world in the form of houses, cars, buildings, businesses, and bank accounts.”

“Conflict can be transformed when hijacked governing institutions—first and foremost the military, which is simply a mishmash of ethnic militias—are reformed. Establishing measures of accountability is key. There must be financial accountability for the stolen assets; legal accountability for crimes against humanity; and political accountability which could exclude those responsible for the worst abuses from a future government.”

“The most promising policy approach would combine creative anti-money laundering measures with targeted sanctions aimed at kleptocratic networks, the combination of which would be robustly enforced with the objective of not just freezing a few assets, but rather freezing those willing to commit mass atrocities out of the international financial system altogether… This is revolutionary, because it would suddenly give international policymakers and diplomats a major point of leverage to impact the calculations of those willing to commit mass atrocities to maintain or gain power.”

“Given the dominant position of the United States in the international financial system, and the extreme vulnerability to which the assets of South Sudan’s kleptocrats are exposed within that system, the United States is uniquely positioned to help alter the incentives for South Sudan’s leaders away from grand corruption and war, and to give peace a chance in that embattled and long-suffering land.”

“Ultimately, South Sudanese people will drive reform and determine their future. From the outside, the United States, Europe, the United Nations, the African Union, and other concerned actors around the world can provide support and solidarity to the efforts of South Sudanese people who are on the front lines of efforts to build peace, good governance, and accountability.”
Link to full report: http://eno.ug/2mZwPjE

For media inquiries or interview requests, please contact: Greg Hittelman, Director of Communications, +1 310 717 0606, gh@enoughproject.org.

About THE ENOUGH PROJECT

The Enough Project, an atrocity prevention policy group, seeks to build leverage for peace and justice in Africa by helping to create real consequences for the perpetrators and facilitators of genocide and other mass atrocities. Enough aims to counter rights-abusing armed groups and violent kleptocratic regimes that are fueled by grand corruption, transnational crime and terror, and the pillaging and trafficking of minerals, ivory, diamonds, and other natural resources. Enough conducts field research in conflict zones, develops and advocates for policy recommendations, supports social movements in affected countries, and mobilizes public campaigns. Learn more – and join us – at www.EnoughProject.org.

A Warning to Gen. Cirillo from the Nuer S.C: Mistakes Any Armed Opposition MUST not Do

BY: J. Nguen, Chairman, Nuer Supreme Council, Lawyer, MAR/20/2017, SSN;

South Sudan has been at war by itself since 15 of December 2013. This internal strife sent the new country to a new low and finally to a failed state status by all accounts. This failed state status is undeniably tragic development.

So much so, it’s a heart-rending confirmation that our peoples’ expectations and hopes during independence have been shattered. Sadly, at the moment, the same people who were so jubilant 5 years ago are now running for their dear lives.

Some are disturbingly starving to death in the north part of the country, particularly in Leer and Mayiendit Counties, Unity State, because the same failed state’s authorities denied them humanitarian aides.

It’s even more troubling to report that peoples’ hopes for prosperity and prosperous South Sudan were crushed through an ill-conceived tribal hegemony of one tribe led by Salva Kiir and his tribal group –the Jieng Council of Elders (JCE).

As such, the implications of this tribal project are enormous. For example, these implications destroyed our nation’s social fabric, which in turn rendered the new country worthless and then brought profound disgrace to the nation’s pioneers and martyrs.

During the Sudan’s second civil war, South Sudanese including Salva Kiir detested and blamed northern Sudanese’ for their marginalization policies toward the rest of us in the Sudan. But, ironically, in a reverse satanic devised policy, Salva Kiir followed similar dogma of marginalization and neglect against other nationalities in South Sudan for Dinka Community rule.

In this regard, unknowingly, Salva Kiir set up the Dinka community against the rest of South Sudanese which will take years to reverse. Salva Kiir’s discriminatory policies allowed him to deny humanitarian aides reaching those in need simply because they are not from the Dinka Community.

Salva Kiir has effectively used this card of starving innocent civilians from other tribes in South Sudan as a weapon of war, while on the other hand undeniably advocating for humanitarian aides to Dinka.

By all measures, this is dreadfully appalling and it must be condemn morally and on the grounds that all South Sudanese are one and that South Sudan shall ever be one nation, where everyone ought to be treated with respect and dignity irrespective of their tribes.

In an attempt to achieve stability in South Sudan, the agreement aimed to address its internal strife was signed on August 2015. Internationally, it was an agreement on the resolution of the conflict in the Republic South Sudan brokered by the IGAD and the international community.

Unfortunately, this agreement formally collapsed on July 8th, 2016, ten (10) months after signature for reasons beyond the scope of this commentary.

After that brief cessation of hostilities in most part of the country, when the agreement was signed, all armed oppositions’ leaderships converged in Juba to implement the peace. However on July 8th, 2016, South Sudanese’ common men were once again forced to take up arms against Kiir’s regime in order to reduce another ethnic -driven killing of innocent civilians, raping of women and girls, looting of properties, arbitrary arrest and burning down of villages, mostly in non-Dinka areas in South Sudan.

While Salva Kiir was progressively pursuing ethnic cleansing, another policy took a centre stage. For example, military officers of non-Dinka nationalities, who sided with Salva Kiir’s regime all along fighting for Salva’s tribal agenda were now rendered irrelevant and sometime openly harass and told that their services no longer needed after Kiir consolidated and emboldened his grip on power.

Recently, this new policy forced some military officers to divorce the regime. For example, LT. Gen. Thomas Cirillo Swaka defected and called for the removal of Salva Kiir by force while citing abuses and Dinkanization of South Sudan. On March 7th, 2017, Mr. Cirillo formed a new movement called “National Salvation Front/Army (NAS).

The NAS’s aim is to depose Salva Kiir from power militarily. Many applauded Mr. Cirillo’s defection citing that it was a right step in removing the dictator. For some, it was a good decision because it further explained and justified the Dinkanization of South Sudan led by Salva Kiir and the JCE.

Above all else, I should say, Mr. Cirillo’s defection declaration statement was a serious indictment of Kiir’s regime. The document speaks to the truth why other oppositions took arms against Kiir in the first place.

Despite these positive underpins, there are worrying signs of mistakes on Gen. Cirillo’s move. Therefore, if these worrying mistakes are not dealt with carefully and with care, they may undermine the whole badly needed possible alliance of convenience among the armed oppositions in the Republic of South Sudan.

These mistakes which I will note shortly were more or less due to lack of political foresight and experiences on Gen. Thomas Cirillo Swaka’s part. Precisely, Gen. Cirillo is full of himself and clearly not thinking.

Therefore, the best thing he should do now, if I may suggest, is to take a leap backward and rethink strategically of what he really wanted to do to achieving the NAS’s goal. Frankly speaking, recent Gen. Cirillo’s statements and that of his supporters are not in any way helping the NAS.

Since Gen. Thomas Cirillo declared his movement, the NAS, the move was welcomed by many including the SPLM/A (IO) as I mentioned earlier. For example, the Governors of Greater Equatoria in the SPLM/A (IO) wrote a well thought-out letter of appreciation to Gen. Cirillo.

In the letter the Governors called for an alliance of convenience among the armed opposition and with Gen. Cirillo. By all standards, that letter was welcomed news and a great way to start moving forward.

However, some shortsighted opportunists and more so Mr. Cirillo himself see this as a weakness on the SPLM/A-IO part. Evidently and wrongly so, Gen. Cirillo and others see the NAS as an opportunity to springboard the Equatorians’ “cause.”

Frankly, this is a wrong thinking and it must be discouraged strongly. As matter of fact, there is no Equatorians’ “cause” without the cause of the people of South Sudan, Equatorians included.

For example, those who jumped ship or switched sides from the other oppositions and joined the NAS, notably from the SPLM/A (IO) attacked the SPLM/A –IO and accused its leadership falsely.

These attacks on other armed oppositions, particularly the SPLM/A–IO were somehow endorsed by Gen. Cirillo himself as he detailed some of these claims on his letter to Hon. Moussa Faki, the newly elected chairman of Africa Union asking for recognition.

In my view, these kinds of thinking and action are genuinely a cause of concern. As a result, Gen. Cirillo and supporters must be called out.

They must be warned and reminded that there is no Equatorians’ “cause” without the rest of us in South Sudan. Also, it must be made crystal clear that all armed oppositions are in this together, and must work as a team if Gen. Cirillo’s intention is indeed to remove Salva Kiir from power.

Hence, as far as this commentary is concerned, the above narrative was a “cause” of this piece. It was basically intended to warn all armed oppositions in South Sudan that the prevailing undertaking is a mistake and a “NO GO ZONE” or cannot be repeated whatsoever.

More importantly, I must point out that recent Gen. Cirillo’s and supporters’ rhetoric serves no moral and military interest to any armed opposition but the common enemy.

It must be made categorically clear that all armed oppositions are victims of misrule. All took up arms to oppose the Dinkanization of South Sudan spearheaded by Salva Kiir and the JCE, nothing else.

Similarly so, I like to remind Gen. Cirillo about previous mistakes along the same vein and I would like to draw his full attention particularly to the G10 and Dr. Lam Akol’s faction.

First, the G10. This group is headed by Gen. Pagan Amum and has committed the same mistake that Gen. Cirillo is about to commit or has committed. To recap this point further, when some G10 members were detained, the other armed oppositions particularly the SPLM/A (IO) advocated for their release.

However, when the G10 were released, Mr. Pagan Amum and his group took the high road and betrayed the other armed oppositions by declaring neutrality in the war.

It was even reported that Mr. Pagan Amum went as far as saying that the killing of 20,000 innocent Nuer civilians shouldn’t be the “cause” for war in South Sudan. This was a serious mistake on their part.

Since 2014, the G10’s position didn’t only fail but prolonged the war and in reverse has emboldened Salva Kiir’s grip on power. In this light, I would think, Gen. Cirillo and supporters would take note and are smart enough to do the math.

Similarly, Dr. Lam Akol’s action was another mistake. Around November 2016, Dr. Akol’s forces attacked SPLM/A (IO)’s positions in Upper Nile State. The consequences of this miscalculated maneuver were not good simply because it resulted in unnecessary lost of lives of two brave Generals from Dr. Akol’s faction.

Such deaths were uncalled for and would have been avoided if Dr. Lam was indeed thinking at the time. More importantly, these unnecessary lost of lives were not only detrimental to Dr. Akol’s faction but more so to all armed oppositions.

As such, Lt. Gen. Thomas Cirillo Swaka and supporters must be warned that they MUST not repeat the same mistake.

Logically, I surely believe that as much as other armed oppositions needed this supposed holy coalition of convenience with Gen. Cirillo, Mr. Cirillo himself needed this alliance the most to prove that he is indeed genuine and not just a poor soul sent to distract brave Equatorians who are fully committed in toppling Salva Kiir’s regime by all means necessary.

However, given Gen. Cirillo’s moves in the past few weeks, the question of trust has emerged and is in everyone’s mind. At this point, I should point out that no one is certainly sure of Gen. Cirillo’s serious allegiance.

To bring this issue of trust closer to home, Gen. Cirillo has served in Salva Kiir’s regime in many capacities and for many years. Most of all, he has helped Salva Kiir’s regime in the Dinkanization of South Sudan more than any other person in the country.

For example, Lt. Gen. Thomas Cirillo Swaka was a point man for Salva Kiir’s arms sale and logistics for many years. Hence, all the sophisticated weaponries used by Salva Kiir’s regime today against civilians in South Sudan were approved and purchased by Gen. Cirillo himself.

Adding more doubts, Gen. Cirillo has declared his defection and formation of the new armed group in the hotel room in Ethiopia. Imagine, a person of his caliber and coupled with his position in the army has defected without a single bodyguard and has not taken to the bush, why? I leave this lingering question for military experts to ponder.

On the question of trust again, I am afraid a seed of mistrust between Gen. Cirillo and other armed oppositions is already planted.

In my personal opinion, it’s simply unbecoming for any armed opposition to attack another armed oppositions falsely and especially when their ultimate overall goal is to topple the regime of which they oppose, militarily.

To support this point, in the past weeks, Gen. Cirillo and supporters attacked or made grandiose claims about the SPLM/A (IO)’s establishment falsely and this is a cause of concern for me.

Further, against all odds, Gen. Cirillo has requested recognition from the Africa Union’ chairperson. Therefore, it’s high time for someone to tell Gen. Cirillo that no revolutionary has ever requested recognition either directly or remotely from anyone.

It’s rather wrong for Gen. Cirillo or anyone of his caliber to beg for recognition from anyone.

Gen. Cirillo must be told that his approach or strategy in this regard is flatly wrong and raised a lot of questions among many moving forward. At least for many like me, it displayed lack of self-worth and inexperience.

Moving forward, I like Gen. Cirillo to consider the following recommendations:
I. Never again ask anyone to recognize your stand, prove it to them, if indeed your intentions were genuine and for armed opposition.
II. Never attack other armed oppositions on baseless grounds, for they are your best companions in arms. If anything, cherish their successes in defeating the enemy.
III. If your intentions are genuine and for armed opposition, be vigilant and never fall prey or allow yourself to be manipulated by some hovering crooks or never solely believe in any promises. Know that promises are just promises until proven.
IV. Take a leap backwards and immediately change your tone towards other armed oppositions and formally apologize to the SPLM/A (IO) establishment for the inconvenience.
V. Call for armed oppositions’ alliances’ conference to dispel any misinformation about your loyalties.
VI. Never claim military support falsely from any other armed opposition, for the reverse rule is you would be their first target to prove that you are not one of them.

J. Nguen is the chairman of Nuer Supreme Council (NSC), South Sudanese advocate, political commentator and analyst. He can be reached at jamesnguen@gmail.com

The mess in South Sudan isn’t entirely Museveni’s fault: A caution to Gen. Thomas Cirillo

By: Samuel Atabi, MAR/03/2017, SSN;

The Ugandan President, Yoweri Museveni, is not politically a popular man among many in the ethnically divided South Sudan. The source of this political unpopularity can be divided into two main parts: among the non-Dinka group, Mr Museveni is accused of advising President Kiir to adopt dictatorial tendencies in order to advance a tribal hegemony over other non-Dinka tribes; and within the Dinka elite can be found those who hold Mr Museveni responsible for the death of Dr John Garang, the leader of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA).

Garang died in a helicopter crash in 2005 after visiting with Museveni. This group of accusers asserts that Mr Museveni did not share the vision of a “New Sudan” that was espoused by Garang and, therefore, as a motive, he might have colluded with others who had similar view, to eliminate Garang.

In any case, Museveni was the “last man to see Garang alive,” as a criminal prosecutor might say. Together, the two groups are passionate in their belief although there is no incontrovertible evidence to support their positions.

The lingering doubt on the veracity of these accusations tends to support a view expressed by many non-South Sudanese, including two expat friends of mine, that “South Sudanese have the habit of blaming others for their own problems.”

Mr Museveni himself appears to defend himself when he was recently quoted in the media as saying that the main problem in South Sudan is lack of clear-headed leaders, and leaders who are bereft of ideology but who “push the pseudo-ideology of sectarianism of tribes that is detrimental to the people’s well-being.”

If there is no tangible evidence to support the charges against the Ugandan president, can one then hold a contrary view that he has always acted in the best interest of South Sudanese as a people?

In my opinion, the answer is yes, to a large extent. I will explain why.

In the mid-1980’s, the SPLA was some few years old but it was already embroiled in a quarrel arising from accusation that it was giving support to Ugandan rebels; these rebels were resisting the newly installed government of Museveni’s National Resistance Army/Movement (NRA/M).

Unsurprisingly, the NRA government was in turn accused of harboring some SPLA dissidents who had disagreed with Garang’s objective of fighting for “New Sudan;” the dissidents were separatists who favored secession from Sudan.

Among the dissident SPLA officers was a prominent Equatorian who became a close political friend of Museveni’s.

With time, the NRA government made it up with its rebels whose members were then absorbed in various posts in Uganda; but a group of rebels called the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) held out and still exists to this day albeit at a much reduced fighting capacity.

Later, Sudan became the main supporter of the LRA; this in turn spurred Uganda to support Garang’s SPLA. The two leaders then became friends.

The friendship between Garang and Museveni appears not to have been completely consummated though, because there was, at the time, some evidence that Museveni did not share the vision of a united New Sudan as championed by Garang.

In one episode that confirms this claim, and which the author has an intimate knowledge, key Uganda government officials, apparently with a tacit permission from the top, supplied the senior Equatorian officer referred to earlier, with funds and military materiel apparently without the knowledge of Garang.

The purpose for this generosity was for the Equatorian to form a guerilla faction to fight for independence of South Sudan, outside the Garang-led SPLA.

Were this faction to prosper and grow into an effective insurgency, the celebrated support that Museveni was extending to the SPLA would have waned and stopped altogether. But this was not be because this new faction failed to take off as will be explained shortly.

There is another reason why SPLA continued to get support from Uganda. It is now publicly known that Uganda’s assistance to the SPLA was also motivated by the country’s leader’s deep emotional and ideological desire to free South Sudanese from the oppression of the Arab-and Islamic-dominated north Sudan.

Although South Sudan did gain its independence in 2011, Museveni must still remains disappointed by what is going on in our country and also with his erstwhile Equatorian ally.

As pointed out earlier, the logistical and financial support given to this ally was to enable him embark on the recruitment of South Sudanese from all ethnic groups to fight in the proposed faction.

Disappointingly, the man decided to recruit only from his own tribe in Equatoria!

Furthermore, there were no officers to lead these recruits. More distastefully, the funds and vehicles were diverted to promote business activities of the relatives of this officer.

Eventually, word of this monumental incompetence and corruption reached those who provided the assistance and, were it not for the intervention of a close relative of the Ugandan leader, this officer would have faced a military justice, which may have included facing a firing squad.

This is how the well-intentioned project of creating a faction to fight for independence came a cropper.

This debacle should act as a cautionary tale to my brother, Gen. Thomas Cirillo Swaka, the leader of the newly-created National Salvation Front (NAS). Like the failed officer, he is an Equatorian.

Furthermore, there is now a heightened expectation not only among the Equatorians but also among other South Sudanese that NAS might be the answer for the removal the terrible regime now in Juba. He must not fail and disappoint them.

General Swaka should resist the temptation to go tribal and to succumb to an abhorrent Jieng Council of Elders’ type of machination and maleficence that have destroyed the country.

He should remain firm against tribal-minded “expert” advisers and a Bari Council of Elders, if one (ever) exists.

To my fellow compatriots, South Sudanese, presidents and leaders do not have to follow advice given to them; they must first know what they want to achieve.

On this score, I will hesitate to blame Mr Museveni for the calamity now befalling us.

Samuel Atabi is a concerned South Sudanese and can be reached at: samuelatabi@gmail.com

Truth telling and reconciliation go together, why’d South Sudan be exceptional?

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, Kampala, Uganda, MAR/19/2017, SSN;

In John 8:32, Jesus told His disciples, “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” Consequently as it has been observed by some people “the truth will set you free” has become a common saying in academic circles as a way of promoting academic freedom and the power of learning. As a result, many universities have this statement emblazoned on a sign near the entrance of a building.

When Jesus said the above well-known statement, he had just finished a speech at the temple where He delineated differences between Himself and His listeners. He told His listeners that “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins” (John 8:23–24). The result of Jesus’ message was that “even as he spoke, many believed in him” (verse 30).

Thus, my argument in this article is that unless we tell the truth in South Sudan peace will never be achieved and it is only when we tell the truth that is when the truth will set us free by terming with the truth and achieve lasting peace.

Hence, this article is about the National Dialogue of South Sudan. It is intended to draw the attention of the leaders of South Sudan to the fact that that if they have opted for National Dialogue as a way of bringing peace through National Reconciliation, then the truth telling in its real meaning must go hand in hand with it.

Without the truth telling, the National Dialogue will never achieve peace as it will be devoid of truth and as a result, it will be waste of time as the National dialogue and reconciliation cannot be achieved without the truth telling.

This is because National Dialogue and Truth Telling go together as seen in different countries where the National Dialogue was adopted as a method of bringing peace and South Sudan should not be an exception to that effect.

South Africa, for instance, Truth telling and Reconciliation were adopted together in the process of achieving peace after the devastating apartheid rule. In order to do that South Africa formed the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) which was an independent body. Because of being independent body it was able to deal comprehensively with serious crimes that were committed during apartheid rules as it is the case in South Sudan today.

In South Sudan, there were serious violations of human rights like what happened in South Africa. In its final report, the African Union (AU) Commission of Inquiry on the situation in South Sudan concluded that war crimes and crimes against humanity had been committed since the conflict erupted in December 2013 and recommends the establishment of accountability mechanisms.

In order to achieve peace in South Africa, Truth telling in the National Reconciliation process was adopted and consequently, it helped in achieving National Reconciliation. The reason the truth telling is required in the process of reconciliation is that truth telling is part of justice.

This is because by telling the truth the victims may be satisfied with the truth, which will eventually result into reconciliation and lasting peace.

In fact, truth telling is one of the methods of achieving restorative justice. In the case of South Africa as already explained above, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that was providing truth telling and reconciliation process was described to be e a court-like restorative justice (see; Suffolk University, College of Arts & Sciences, Center for Restorative Justice, http://www.suffolk.edu/college/centers/15970.php What is Restorative Justice?)

The reason truth and reconciliation process achieved peace in South Africa despite some of the apparent limitations that were embedded in its process was that witnesses who were also identified as victims of gross human rights violations were invited to give statements about their experiences, and some were selected for public hearings.

In the same way, perpetrators of violence were also called upon to give testimony and request to be given amnesty from both civil and criminal prosecution.

Hence, the TRC, the first of the 1003 held internationally to stage public hearings, was seen by many as a crucial component of the transition to full and free democracy in South Africa. Despite some flaws, it is generally (although not universally) thought to have been successful in South Africa.

In Canada, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was organized by the parties to address the inhuman treatments that were meted out of the Aboriginal men and women in which families were separated from their children.

According to the TRC report, the separation was done purposely to minimize the family’s ability to pass along their cultural heritage to their children. The commission spent six years traveling to different parts of Canada to hear the testimony of approximately six thousand Aboriginal people who were taken away from their families and placed in residential schools as children.

After the closing of the Indian residential schools, which, operated from 1870s to 1996 and when the TRC investigated it, it was found to be holding some 150,000 aboriginal children over the decades. In addition, some former students made allegations to the TRC of physical, psychological, sexual abuse and neglect.

The TRC studied records and took testimony for evidence of activities alleged to have occurred at residential schools, as well as the negative effects resulting from the schools’ stated aim to assimilate First Nations children into the majority culture. The matter of student deaths at these institutions and the burial of deceased students in unmarked graves without the notification or consent of the parents was an additional item on the agenda of the TRC.

In March 2008, Indigenous leaders and church officials embarked on a multi-city ‘Remembering the Children’ tour to promote activities of the TRC. On January 21–22, 2008, the King’s University College of Edmonton, Alberta, held an interdisciplinary studies conference on the subject of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee.

On June 11 of the same year, Prime Minister Stephen Harper apologized for the role of past governments in administration of the residential schools.

As seen above in the cases of both South Africa and Canada, which the same with other countries were the TRC was adopted which are beyond the scope of this paper due to the limited space for the sake of the readers, it is important to observe that where the country opts to adopt the dialogue as a means of achieving peace then there must be truth telling accompanying the dialogue in achieving the reconciliation.

In the case of South Sudanese National Dialogue, there is no truth telling accompanying the reconciliation process which the authorities are trying to achieve through the National Dialogue. This is because there is a lot of hypocrisy on the side of the Government.

For example, the Government is claiming to be trying to bring true peace through National Dialogue yet it is the same government, which is using its state security apparatuses to oppress South Sudanese by subjecting them to arbitrary detention.

Hence, in the situation where there are a lot of intimidation then the conditions necessary for true dialogue are not there, hence, there is no true National Dialogue.

In addition, the government has seriously curtailed freedom of expression on National Dialogue. For instance, the Dialogue is badly structured but when any person expresses such concerns then he or she is seen as anti-peace.

The question is: who is anti-peace, the one using force to silent the people or those who are suffering and complaining because of the sufferings?

The clear example in this category is the institution called Church. Some of the Church leaders have fallen victims in the hands of state security due to the fact that they have expressed dissenting opinion on the way the National Dialogue is being conducted while some among them are branded as rebels and kept under twenty four (24) hour surveillance of National Security cameras.

In the circumstances as seen above, the national dialogue will never be successful since in the national dialogue there is a need for the truth to be told in order to achieve reconciliation but where the truth is not told there is no reconciliation.

Hence, for reconciliation to be achieved in South Sudan through the current national dialogue, there must be truth telling and authorities must lift sanctions on the freedom of speech and expression.

In addition, in South Sudan, the national dialogue is not inclusive as the question of the leadership of the SPLM/A-IO is not resolved. Currently, there are two parallel SPLM/A-IOs: one in the bush and another in Juba.

Whereas SPLM/A-IO in Juba has clear leadership in person of Taban Deng Gai, the leadership of the SPLM/A-IO in the bush is not determined and as long as it is not determined, the Reconciliation which the Government needs to achieve through National Dialogue will never be successful, whether the Government likes it or not.

How can you talk of reconciliation if the enemy is not the one reconciling with you? Whom are you reconciling with? The government needs to acknowledge the truth that there is a need for comprehensive cease-fire as part of National Dialogue through which reconciliation can be achieved.

Above of all, before we talk of National Dialogue, there is a need for independent TRC to be established as the sole body responsible for the conduct of the National Dialogue and reconciliation as it was done in both South Africa and Canada.

The current joke of which the President who is a party to conflict is the Patron of the Dialogue should stop or be discarded and the law establishing TRC should be passed by South Sudan Parliament in Juba.

Finally, there is a problem with both the Government and the SPLM/A-IO. These two parties have committed terrible crimes or crimes against humanity and war crimes but they are not ready to acknowledge this truth and without acknowledging the responsibility of these crimes, the reconciliation will never be achieved.

The only way of achieving lasting peace in South Sudan is to account for the crimes committed against all South Sudanese starting from 1990s to date.

In summary, the question of the leadership of the SPLM/A-IO must be resolved to unite the rebels; there is a need for TRC to be established in order to take charge of the process; there is also a need for inclusive dialogue; further, there is a need for truth telling about the crimes committed in South Sudan.

Without the truth, the reconciliation will never be achieved.

What needs to be acknowledged honestly is the fact that terrible war crimes and crimes against humanity have been committed in all parts of South Sudan. Because of that the government and the Oppositions or rebels must confess and accept the responsibility for these crimes if lasting peace is to be achieved.

Denying the responsibility or using force to silence those who point out the truth about the war crimes and crimes against humanity in South Sudan will not help at all.

Rebels and the government, whether they like it or not, must in the future account for the blood of South Sudanese.

In general, as we have seen in the discussion above truth telling and reconciliation go together and without the truth reconciliation will never be achieved, this is why the two have been adopted in the peace process in various countries where TRC model has been adopted as a method of bringing peace.

If it is adopted in those countries, why should South Sudan be exceptional?

NB//: the author is South Sudanese Human Rights Lawyer residing in Uganda and can be reached through: juoldaniel@yahoo.com/+256783579256