Category: Uncategorized

Is the new threat from Troika credible? The Oppositions should not celebrate yet

By: Samuel Atabi, JUL/24/2017, SSN;

South Sudanese will forever be grateful to the Americans, particularly the neo-conservatives in the younger Bush regime, for conjuring up their political independence from the Sudan. Unlike the liberals, who view ‘neo-conservatisms’ as a war-mongering tag, South Sudanese view it as batch of honor.

Even then, the neo-conservatives took note of the war of independence in Sudan only after that country became a hotbed for terrorists, including Osama bin Laden; terrorism being the number one priority of the US foreign policy.

However, the actual birth of the new nation of South Sudan, in 2011, was midwifed by another batch of Americans under the Democratic President, Barrack Obama. It is now clear that the Obama administration was not prepared for the war that convulsed that new country barely two years into its nationhood; the president admitted as much.

Following the outbreak of a civil war in South Sudan in 2013, the Americans, together with the British and the Norwegians (all the three collectively known as the Troika), worked tirelessly to get a peace agreement to end the war. They did get the agreement in August 2015.

But again barely six months into the implementation of the agreement, President Salva Kiir of South Sudan, a party to the agreement, literally bombed the pact out of Juba in July 2016. Using a superior military fire power, Kiir attacked the home of and with the aim of killing Dr Riek Machar, his partner in the peace agreement.

What followed this brazen violation of the agreement have been the missteps by the US and its Troika partners. Instead of coming hard on President Kiir for his unacceptable behavior, they largely kept quiet. This silence emboldened Kiir to launch unbridled violence against the Equatoria, a region which had hitherto been spared by the civil war.

From media reports, the Troika did not just keep quiet in the face of Kiir’s defiance but they also took three other additional steps which have aggravated the calamity in the country:
— i) They instructed regional governments bordering South Sudan (known as IGAD) to deny Machar entry into their countries;
— ii) They asked South Africa to hold Dr Riek Machar under house arrest, thus denying him access to his followers; and
— iii) They offered Sudan, a country that was known to be the main weapon supplier to Machar’s forces, the possibility of US lifting sanction that had been in place for decades as a quid pro quo for stopping the arms supply.

The overall effects of these moves not only left Kiir in a stronger and an advantageous military position, but it also further encouraged him to kill more South Sudanese with impunity.

The genocidal rampage by Kiir’s tribal army and militia against South Sudanese continued for 11 months while the Troika and the international community continued, in the main, to sit on their hands and refused to take action against Kiir.

At last, after desperate reports by UN agencies and other international organizations on the devastation of war in South Sudan, the Troika appears to stir as recently as the third week of July 2017.

Now, the Troika and the European Union (EU) are threatening to stop funding the parasitic institutions, such as the JEMEC, which are alleged to be implementing the bombed and dead August 2015 agreement. Late as this threat might be, it is very much welcomed by many concerned organizations, and certainly by millions of South Sudanese who are in the IDP’s and refugee camps.

The Troika and the EU have also demanded the revitalization of the dead agreement as a condition for further support to the peace process. If these threats were to elicit the expected outcome, then the Oppositions will have achieved a small victory: they have always called for the re-examination of the moribund peace agreement, some of whose clauses have become obsolete.

But, the Oppositions must not be complacent about the future course of events. There are still obstacles to the attainment of a lasting peace in our country. Below, I enumerate some of them.

Safety and New Agreement.
I am convinced that the attack on Machar in July, 2016, though not approved, but had a tacit approval of some of the guarantors of the August 2015 peace agreement. A number of circumstantial evidence has been adduced to support this: silence by these countries on that attack; acquiescence in the appointment of Taban Deng Gai to replace Machar as the Vice President; intimidation of the IGAD countries to deny Machar visa and residency; his exiling to South Africa; etc.

In my opinion, the countries involved appear to have reached a conclusion that, the Dinka, as a single largest tribe in South Sudan, cannot be wished away and therefore, they should be given time to moderate their approaches in the governance of the country. Thereafter, they (the Dinka) will be able to co-opt other tribal leaders in governments that will be dominated by them.

In Afghanistan, the American encouraged the Taliban, a Pashtun outfit to rule that country simply because the Pashtun are the majority. This is what the State Department said, in a secret UN Security Council, about the Taliban at the time when the latter was a virtual pariah in the world:

“For the sake of peace, all nations should engage with the Taliban. They control more than two-thirds of the country; they are Afghan; they are indigenous; and they have demonstrated their staying power…Providing covert military aid to Massoud (an opposition leader to Taliban and from a minority Panjiri ethnic group) would only lead to more Afghan civilian deaths, while prolonging the country’s military stalemate.” [Coll, S. (2004). Ghost Wars. Penguin Books].

This attitude from the State Department persisted even when others, (the CIA, politicians), were urging the Clinton administration to arm the northern Panjiri ‘minority’ opponents of the Taliban under Massoud. The Taliban took advantage of this policy and harbored Osama bin Laden. The policy was radically reversed, though, after September 11 when the Americans now agreed to invade Afghanistan and topple the Taliban at a very high cost.

It is, therefore, not difficult to imagine that similar views are being expressed in private about the South Sudan situation. Now, if this is the attitude of the guarantors, then implementation of the August agreement in the original format, with Machar going back as the First Vice-President, is a dangerous undertaking: there is no guarantee that the July 2016 incident cannot be repeated.

Policy Suggestion: The IO and other opposition groups should go back to the drawing board to plan an agreement that will safeguard the lives of leaders and their soldiers during its implementation.

In practice, the IO and the Opposition should be less insistence on the wholesale reinstatement of the original ACRSS.

Deployment of the Protection Force:

Based on the utterances of officials like JMEC Chairman and some diplomats, the main purpose of the UN protection force appears not to protect the leaders and soldiers of the opposition groups in Juba.

The real purpose at inception, it appears, was to protect Juba against the expected assault by the White Army and the wider IO forces on the city following the July, 2016 incident.

This assault was expected to take place during the dry season of 2016. When the invasion did not materialize, these officials gave a sigh of relief and the urgency for the deployment of the force waned.

Previously, some members of the mediation, IGAD et al, were very concerned about the capture of Juba by the White Army and the IO forces following the pogrom of December, 2013.

Why? It was because the invading army, if allowed to enter Juba, would have destroyed all the emerging institutions of government in the city and also killed most of city’s inhabitants.

In order to prevent this, they had to okay the Ugandan’s involvement in the defense of Juba that entailed the use of cluster bombs against the IO forces.

In my view, as the Ugandans have officially withdrawn now (I may be talking too soon), Juba can only be protected by the UN deployment of a protection force.

Policy Suggestion: The IO and other Opposition groups should not be assured by the deployment of the protection force. They should be less enthusiastic, if not unconcerned, in pushing for the deployment.

Instead, the opposition should push for a country-wide UN protection force that would secure civilians in places like, Yei, Magwi, Keji-keji, Wau, and towns and centers in Greater Upper Nile.

A successful deployment of protection force with the current mandate will actually frustrate a successful capture of Juba if this is what the Oppositions wish.

In addition, the protection force might unwittingly facilitate the escape of the government culprits and potential war criminals in Juba through the protected airport.

The Trusteeship
The proposed Trusteeship by experts and some diplomats is problematic. For example, it might be very difficult in future to end it as has happened in other countries like Namibia.

Politically, those advocating for it might be accused by the regime in Juba of being unpatriotic and traitors to the independence of our country. It is thus understandable to read policy documents of both IO and NAS rejecting the proposal.

In my opinion, the outright rejection of the proposal is counterproductive. The July 2016 incident and its aftermaths have militarily weakened the IO, and therefore, the entire opposition; Sudan, which has been a source of armament, is no longer in play.

A protracted armed struggle will last for up to 50 years if our previous wars are anything to go by.

Politicians take up arms because they want power to bring change and leaders of the opposition groups are not immune to that. Who among the leaders can wait for the next 50 years to gain power?

The answer is none. The estimated time for the trusteeship is ten years; this is more realistic waiting time that the five decades of civil war. In any case, the Oppositions might also gain from the disarmament of all forces that must necessarily precede the start of the trusteeship.

Policy suggestion: The Oppositions should not reject the Trusteeship proposal outright but should ask for more clarifications about its nature, including structure, mandate and time limit.

This will encourage dialogue. Therefore, in practice, the Oppositions should indicate that they have open mind and remain to be persuaded about the proposal.

Finally, the war in our country cannot be ended without the involvement of the one and the only world’s Superpower, the United States of America. And yet this assertion is undermined by the scope and practice of the US foreign policy.

As Henry Kissinger once said, “America’s desire to project power into myriads of small scale conflict−Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti, South Sudan−is a key conceptual challenge for American foreign policy”. We can only hope.

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

Mayiik and Ateny: The Dead Woods in the Kiir’s Juba Palace (J1)

Quote: “The real prison is the wall of silence erected around you by your colleagues, which prevents you from seeing or hearing the truth, until I have arrived to this place (Paris), I didn’t know I have been overthrown in Khartoum” says Sudanese President late Jafaar Mohammed Nimeri in 1985.

By Kharubino Kiir Garang, Juba, South Sudan, JUL/20/2017, SSN;

One of the revulsions of history is that it often repeats itself. After dethronement of Mayen Wol Jong and Yel Luol Koor from J1 on financial scandals, there was hope that J1 is liberated from all sorts of corrupt cartels.

Unfortunately, here arose other bastards in J1 in person of Ateny Wek Ateny, the president’s spokesperson, and Mayiik Deng Ayii.

These dudes are not only administratively corrupt but intellectually bankrupt to serve in the highest office of the land. They erected the wall of lies to block the truth from reaching the president.

They control President’s ears, they determine what to give to the President to hear and what to ignore. They deprive him from hearing the truths from grassroots.

Not only that, but they are also depriving him of meeting good people carrying gospel messages. They are destroying him!

Honestly, his office is filled with people attributively incompetent. His office is packed of people that are either unschooled or functionally illiterate. Others are gifted bloviates, introverts and loquacious people. They are a disgrace to the Presidency in disguise.

They are unproductive and unappreciative. They helped a lot in destroying this man, a man of adjustable coats and characteristically humble. Socially cordial but politically less absolved. That believes in people and trusts them without verification; though he is a strategist, he is not decisive, wise but doesn’t have common sense, a strong leader but doesn’t command.

Nevertheless, by his side always is good luck.

A man that forgets more than he remembers, doesn’t evaluate the performance, fails to hire qualified ones, recycles the bad confidants and expects different outcomes. At times, he finds it hard to penetrate through political traps.

His patience and good luck are enormous that his match is rare. That is our President Salva Kiir described in few short sentences.

Like most elders from his ethnic extraction, he over-trusts. In most cases, he suffices within the circle of his foes.

Although his fickle personality has denied him the best description a revolutionist deserves, he still holds a significant respect within the circles of his society.

Despite these great characteristics, he can as well be well described with negative adjectives ordinarily to the considerable displeasure. He is a man who has allowed incoherent aides to encircle him and erected the bulwark to prevent truth from reaching him.

In other words, he will be remembered for his love of espousing the gossip mongering.

One such character is the perpetually bragger and eyeless Ateny Wek Ateny, the man in the President’s press room. He is a man with an open-mouth, a holder of a certificate in criminology and criminal justice, who pretends to be a lawyer.

To call a spade a spade, this creature is fit for a job of investigator and thus a true suitor for Criminal Investigation Department (CID) in the National Police Service.

He is a barricade to progress in the media sector of the big office. He has done nothing to shine the Presidency in media fraternity. In fact, he struggles to utter suitable English words when addressing the media.

He sometimes hire maverick writers to defend the Presidency if the Presidency comes under media attack. He has totally failed the Press office in the Presidency.

Another creature is the freaky Mayiik Ayii Deng who doubles as a functional illiterate. He never graduated from University.

Rumor-mongers and trust tellers have on equal note and in unison accepted that Mayiik Ayii Deng outsource the presidential speeches.

He cannot write a good speech. He can’t piece a significant document. The man is a thick-head. He is always cheesed off. An empty barrel, huge but hollow. Masura!

With their lots of nothingness, they are contributing very much to its downfall. Zilch —–success though they are kept there for decades.

They have projected the President in bad light. With Mayiik Ayii Deng, presidency became the centre for deals. Ateny has turned the Presidency as an honor to brag about. They have never created any positive image for the big man.

Reliably, both men have been alleged to might have failed to even read a page from the two volumes of a book that is a collection of President’s public speeches.

Like elsewhere, that book is an independent source of the part of the contemporary history of our liberation struggle. It is a very great book that President can appreciate if he is served with a copy.

Skeptically, they didn’t take a copy of the book to the President to read his well authored biography and a great collection of his own speeches including those he cannot even remember.

Had he gotten the book, I believe the President would have sponsored the publication of second edition because there are some errors in the book.

In other words, President Kiir would have called these writers that had volunteered to waste their time, resources and energy to compile the speeches for a ‘thank you’ meeting and handshake.

I bought one from the bookshop and it is appealing. It has great collections of the President’s speeches, interviews, articles and letters. These young men deserve appreciation for transcribing videos into scripts. Very hard work, just imagine transcribing ‘BBC Hard Talk’ video into a script!

One may wonder, where on earth would a president be surrounded by people who cannot do research? People who do not have ability to go through the compiled information? It is only in South Sudan!

These people have failed in many aspects. Ateny has never effected the job, instead he has been stammering while inconsistently addressing the media. He loves the cameras that he feeds it with falsehood that are indefensible.

It is as well alleged that majority of those in the office of the President depend on magic powers and that their passports would tell you how they frequently visit Nigeria in search for magic powers.

President should help himself by booting out all such dysfunctional dead woods.

To conclude, the strength of any leadership is determined by the intelligence of closet cohorts. It is pathetic that these cohorts of Kiir in J1 are worthless.

Starting from the perpetually inebriated Tor Deng Mawien, the mentally desiccated Gen. Awet Akot, to the legally dull Lawrence Korbandi.

Like the semi-illiterate group of Ateny and Mayiik, this group of blue blood people can’t produce anything good for the greatness of this country.

With ongoing shrinking of the President’s legacy, Kiir must sack them all to save his reputation and claim it back again. I have my own reservations but a lot can be said.

Writer can be reached at kharubinokiir83@gmail.com

Dr. Lam’s NDM ambushes gov’t forces in Eastern Equatoria

THE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT (NDM)

On the 17th instant, the gallant forces of the National Democratic Movement (NDM) laid a deliberate ambush on an enemy convoy moving to attack their positions. The ambush occurred on the Torit-Hillieu road, Eastern Equatoria.

One enemy car was completely destroyed.

In a related development, the overall commander of the NDM forces in the area, CDR Okongo God Comman, received into the ranks of the NDM seven soldiers who defected from the enemy, two of them from the CID.

The names of the seven (7) are:
1. Moses Okulo (CID)
2. Gatluak Kuong (CID)
3. Sgt. James Oting
4. Lcpl. James Odong
5. Pvt. Ukelo Justin
6. Pvt. James Oboya
7. Pvt. Santino Allajabo

The Chairman of the NDM congratulated the new members for their patriotic decision to choose the broad front as a mean for waging a revolutionary struggle in order to free the people of South Sudan from the dictatorial and ethnocentric regime of Kiir and his Jieng Council of Elders.

The Chairman assured the new members that the struggle to uproot corruption, injustice and tribalism is not easy but with our determination and adoption of the correct means and methods of the struggle, the people of South Sudan shall surely triumph.

19th July, 2017
Press Release
Long live the struggle of our people
Long live South Sudan
A luta continua

Ambassador; Emmanuel Aban
For/ the Spokesman
National Democratic Movement (NDM)

Festus Mogae’s Moral Dilemma: Why he’d quit and go home

BY: Dr. Dr Lako Jada Kwajok, JUL/17/2017, SSN;

Bringing peace to a war-torn country is the pinnacle of political achievement that any politician would love to be associated with. It’s not in any way less important than the attainment of independence.

In fact, to some extent the two are interrelated. For Ex-Presidents, like Festus Mogae, it’s an opportunity for adding good things to their reputations and expanding their legacies from national to international and perhaps from continental to worldwide recognition.

It’s also a golden chance to keep them busy in their retirement and relative inactivity. It’s often difficult to adapt from having a high demanding job to a state of more or less redundancy.

Perhaps this is why Ex-Presidents occupy their time by establishing libraries, going around delivering speeches and lectures, running charity organisations, taking up consultancy jobs and getting involved in peace initiatives across the globe.

I would like to think that, when an Ex-President or an Ex-International official, is given the honour of helping to realise peace anywhere in the world – he or she, would be in the best possible position that any politician would like to have. It’s because of the following reasons:

Firstly – he or she is deemed a neutral figure, thus is not under any political pressure other than the need to expedite the peace process within the adopted time frame. And certainly, he or she is under no obligation to give in to pressure from any side or heed the demands of the lobbying groups.

Secondly – he or she is also free from the self-restrictions and hidden obligations of the career politicians who would do anything to keep their jobs.

Thirdly – Such personalities usually enjoy generous pensions and do have significant life insurances. They do not need the financial gains from their given positions, and to some, what is offered amounts to peanuts.

Hence, one would have expected Mogae to act with full impartiality, diligence and straightforwardness. Most importantly, people had hoped that he would call a spade a spade particularly in the case of peace spoilers.

We must remember that we have already lost tens of thousands of lives and still more lives are at stake due to the escalating war. There is no room for appeasements or half-solutions because they would not result in a lasting peace in a country that’s already on the brink.

Mogae’s recent statement to the 18th JMEC Plenary on 12/07/2017 raised many questions and evoked a lot of concerns. The general theme is overblown unsubstantiated progress regarding the implementation of the Peace Agreement and the downplaying of glaring failures.

For example, he claimed that good progress had been made by the National Constitutional Amendment Commission (NCAC) towards review and amendment of relevant legislation.

Do we call it a real progress, given the fact that it took over a couple of years to happen?

The provisions of the Agreement on Resolution of Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (ARCSS) state that the NCAC should come up with the appropriate Constitutional Amendments before the commencement of the Transitional Government of National Unity (TGoNU).

It transpires that the unrecognised current TGoNU has got no Constitution. Then, where is the progress here?!

The JMEC boss admits that the graduation of the first batch of the joint integrated Police took place without adherence to the required vetting process. It’s certainly a major concern given the current environment of mistrust between the parties.

The question is, what did Mogae do to rectify the situation and avert a potential source of conflict?

His talk regarding the economy is merely for public consumption. It’s very unconvincing to speak about government institutions and public finances reforms when the layperson in South Sudan knows that the economy has tanked and corruption is on a large scale.

It’s even less believable that, the TGoNU has a 3-5 years national development strategy while unable to pay the wages of its employees for months. People have even started to entertain the idea of the government of South Sudan declaring bankruptcy.

The Hybrid Court of South Sudan (HCSS) which is supposed to be an independent entity, is now to be discussed with the “TGoNU.” So, how credible that accountability would be well-served through such a court?!

Lack of real achievements has reduced the JMEC boss into talking about and highlighting some insignificant events. For example, he pointed out the sensitization and awareness missions that were conducted by the Technical Consultative Committee for the establishment of the Commission for Truth, Reconciliation and Healing (CTRH).

If he admits that the conditions for successful consultations are far from optimal, then what is the point of bringing the whole issue up?

Furthermore, there is no mention of the security arrangements and cantonment in the document. Everyone agrees that this single matter takes precedence over the other provisions in the Peace Agreement for obvious reasons. So, how could the JMEC boss talk about the CTRH while omitting the security arrangements that have a direct bearing on the reconciliatory process? It implies that the implementation of the security mechanisms and cantonment hasn’t moved forward in a meaningful way to allow the JMEC boss to talk about it.

Surprisingly, Mogae turns 180 degrees saying he is concerned that the permanent Constitution-making process is yet to commence and that they are clearly out of time. It sounds like he has inadvertently admitted failure to effect the full implementation of ARCSS in spirit and letter.

Now it seems the embattled JMEC boss is putting all his hopes for being relevant on the High-Level Revitalisation Forum (HLRF) that was prescribed by the IGAD leaders following his recommendations. If the JMEC could not effect a meaningful progress over a period of 2 years, how plausible that it would be successful this time?

Mogae has made it clear that the HLRF is not for renegotiation. Then, what would be the role of the so-called estranged groups in the forum? And how could the forum be inclusive and accommodative without taking the views of all the stakeholders into account?

A scrutiny of the measures suggested by JMEC boss reveals that what he is pushing for is point number (3) which is the development of a revised and realistic timeline and implementation of a schedule towards democratic elections at the end of the transition period.

Now they have realised that the clock is ticking and the moment of truth is drawing closer which is the end of the TGoNU next year as specified by ARCSS. So, is he pushing for preparation for elections without the recognised TGoNU ever being formed? Or that he wants the extension of its tenure before it even started?

The reality is that ARCSS is dead. There is no path to a lasting peace emanating from what Mogae and the JMEC would want us to believe.

It’s sad that the JMEC boss continues to issue statements like the following one, I quote: “The Peace Agreement is still alive but has been wounded, the revitalization forum formed by the IGAD heads of states on the 12th of June 2017 in Addis Ababa is set to get the Agreement back on track.” The audience could see how he contradicted himself in a single statement.

There are similarities between the tragedy in Syria and the one happening in South Sudan. Coincidentally, the situation facing Mogae is akin to what Ex- UN Secretary General Kofi Annan went through when he was the UN-Arab League Joint Special Envoy for the Syrian Crisis. It only took Kofi Annan 5 months to tender his resignation on the 02/08/2012.

The following is an excerpt from his resignation letter, “My concern from the start has been the welfare of the Syrian people. Syria can be saved from the calamity – if the international community can show the courage and leadership necessary to compromise on their partial interests for the sake of the Syrian people.”

What Kofi Annan did compels everyone to bow to him in full respect. It re-inforces what I always believed that politics is not all about Machiavellianism and material gains, but there is a moral obligation tied to it.

Festus Mogae is, of course, free to follow his conscience but at this juncture, a real friend would advise him to go home right now. His presence is sending the wrong message that a peace process is underway while in reality, nothing of that sort exists. His departure would pave the way for genuine endeavours to find a solution to the crisis in our beloved country.

Dr Lako Jada Kwajok

Gen. Thomas Cirillo, C-in-C of NAS: 9th July Independence Day Message to all

Dated: JULY 9th, 2017, National Salvation Front/Army. SSN;

To countrymen and women, those imprisoned, tortured or even killed in these years of tribulations, I salute all our peoples: our gallant men and women serving in the forces of our struggle;
–the internally displaced in the bushes and POC camps, those in refugee camps in neighboring countries;
–those in the Diaspora etc, etc…..

Eleven long years since that Day in 2005 when the CPA was signed in Naivasha, Kenya and 6 long cruel years since the Dawn of Independence broke in are experiencing the severest forms of hardship in a country whose hopes at independence were so high and have been thoroughly dashed without any pangs of conscience by those who claimed to be peoples’ leaders;

Your suffering for all those years refresh in our memory the heroes of 1955, who, following their instincts, far less resourced than we’re today, dared to challenge the oppressive giants of their day — for all their posterity.

The seeds of freedom that they planted in our hearts, to this day, have blossomed into an unquenchable quest for our freedom, our dignity and our unity as a people, bound together inseparably in a long history of struggle to assert our God-given rights, the same rights to all humanity.

We can’t forget the hundreds, if not thousands of martyrs of the brutalities of the CURRENT REGIME IN JUBA.

With their blood they have championed the resistance to the INTERNAL NEO-COLONIAL establishment now crippling life in South Sudan.

In spite of these past sacrifices offered by past and present martyrs and by us, their survivors, we now face an unprecedented, inhuman, antipathetic, morally devoid internal colonialism by a very few who obtained the power they abuse on a silver platter, totally unprepared for it upon the death of our great national hero, Dr. John Garang de Mabior.

With their criminal orientation, they are prepared to smear the reputations of entire clans or even ethnic groups with their long litany of evil deeds.

Their schemes to divide and rule will miserably fail as all the entire peoples of South Sudan have not and will not succumb to their selfish ends; and all the peoples of South Sudan have already unanimously rejected their schemes of division for the benefit of a very few.

We encourage their constituencies and all South Sudanese to hold their chins high not to loose faith and subdue despair as we proudly look to the day when we will have every reason to celebrate all occasions that mark our achievements, however compromised by agents of destruction and repression!

At this juncture I would like to remind ourselves that “freedom and rights are not given” –they are won through hard struggles!

NAS would like to assure our people that it will exert every effort for their unity, whatever the cost, in spite of the bitter seeds of divide and rule being planted and pursued by the SPLM government.

Our unity is our national pride, and the source of our strength. We shall not cease, nor shall we desist, from reminding Mr. Salva Kiir Mayardit and his cohorts that their anti-citizens schemes are destined to utter failure.

We in NAS remind everyone that we have no independence to celebrate, but we do rejoice at the prospects that the fate of the authors of the on-going cruelties is sealed! We celebrate the fact that South Sudan will rise again!

We take the opportunity to remind friend and foe alike that NAS missionary zeal and dedication is towards rallying the entire SOUTH SUDANESE populace to bring about their own salvation – devoid of drives for power or illicit wealth accumulation at the expense of all else.

NAS leaves no stone un-turned in the process of the struggle for the final genuine liberation of our people.

NAS strives to ensure that no efforts will be spared in the quest for the realization of the objectives of the liberation of the South Sudanese peoples.

We hope that our friends and neighbours in the region, IGAD, AU, Troika and the International Community as a whole are able to share with us our remorse on this Independence Day memorial.

There are many ways in which they hurry to our aid. Foremost, the continued existence of the Kiir regime with impunity marks a regrettable moral bankruptcy in those who know and understand the problems of South Sudan.

We need peace as urgently! Many of our friends are in a position to apply the right pressures against Juba, to win an abdication by Kiir, since “forcing him out” is apparently distasteful in many quarters.

We take this opportunity to appeal to our partners in the struggle, other political parties, Civil Society organizations, Faith-based Organizations and others to appreciate the reality that the Juba regime cannot be treated with a business-as-usual attitude.

With the help of the JCE (Jieng Council of Elders), Mathiang Anyor (Dinka ethnic militia) and others who knowingly or unknowingly have been party to the many forms of atrocities committed in our nation against innocent people, the Kiir regime has crossed more RED LINES in South Sudan than any contemporary tyrants.

The JUBA REGIME HAS TO BE STOPPED— BY ALL MEANS NECESSARY. DOING NOTHING CAN NOW BE ONLY INTERPRETED AS SUICIDAL – INDIRECTLY HELPING THE REGIME TO SURVIVE!

Let this occasion be a firm reminder to us all that things have gone despicably wrong in South Sudan – justifying the determination of NAS to restore all rights to decent living for all South Sudanese.

Even the Juba-celebrated National Dialogue (ND), commendable at face-valve, is not a credible tool to address the depths of the problems to which Kiir has brought the country.

NAS will spare no efforts to introduce good governance and sustainable development through top programs such as:
1. Absolute security for all citizens where only God takes life through disease or accidents, but never should we ever again lose life at the hands of fellow-man.
2. The establishment of governance institutions answerable to the people and accountable in every public endeavor.
3. The enactment of a FEDERAL CONSTITUTION THAT CONTAINS ROBUST CHECKS AND BALANCES ON OUR GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH….
8. Putting an end to elite decadent living at the expense of the ordinary citizen, through firm measures to curb corruption and luxurious expenditures in the public sector!
9. Encouraging all the educated citizens in general, and intellectuals in particular – discouraged by the Kiir regime from participating in nation-building ever since the CPA and Independence – return home to participate in effectively laying the foundation for a modern South Sudan.

Our people are absolutely tired of empty sugar-coated speeches that describe Heaven-on-Earth without end.

NAS values words that are immediately put into actions in spite of hurdles that might exist. After all, others in the world are succeeding with very little at their disposal.

Why should we, a people endowed with all forms of God-given resources fail so pathetically?

No, NAS has no stomach for the kinds of excuses on which the citizens of South Sudan have been fed without their basic human needs ever being met!

We caution our citizens, as well as friends from abroad, to refrain from QUICK MONEY SCHEMES THE DESPERATE JUBA REGIME MIGHT UNDERTAKE IN DESPERATE EFFORTS TO SUSTAIN ITS HORRIFIC RULE.

No one sufficiently conscious about the Juba regime should allow themselves to be used by cooperating without questioning the moral aspects of the planned actions or programs.

An obvious example is the current NATIONAL DIALOGUE, only aimed at trashing past serious compromise agreements – without resulting in any substantive change. Nor do we wish to consider the country’s problems as simply a disagreement within the SPLM. They have remorselessly caused us to suffer for many years for no reason.

With God above as our witness, guide, patron and support, we wish to assure all citizens and sympathetic friends that NAS is confident of Victory in the first genuine liberation of our people.

The light at the end of the tunnel is bright. The horizon holds much hope and promise for the present, the future and for generations to come.

Long live the resilient, aspiring and patient citizens of South Sudan.
Long live the NATIONAL SALVATION FRONT
God Bless you.

Your Faithful Servant,

(Signed) Gen. Thomas Cirillo Swaka
CHAIRMAN AND C-IN-C

TCS/asl

Why having the Hybrid Court is undesirable as part of Conflict Resolution in South Sudan

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, Kampala, Uganda, JUL/15/2017, SSN;

The conflict in South Sudan broke between on 15 December 2013. The way it took ethnic dimension accompanied by gruesome killings that shocked the world. The killings were indiscriminate and barbaric.

The killings in Juba against members of Nuer Community on 15 December 2013 were carried out systematically. As a result, Dr. Riek Machar and other Nuer Army Generals declared a war against the government and the Dinka Community. The declaration was soon followed by systematic and widespread killings of Dinka community members in by then three states of Jonglei, Unity and Upper Nile.

Fearing that things would go from bad to worse between Dinka and Nuer that might lead into the country falling apart or the situation might go the Rwanda way, the IGAD and TROIKA moved swiftly to terminate the war by initiating the peace process.

It was this peace process that resulted in into the AGREEMENT ON THE RESOLUTION OF THE CONFLICT IN THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH SUDAN, ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA 17 AUGUST 2015.

In attempt to address the abuses of human rights that followed the outbreak of the 15 December 2013, the Agreement provides for the establishment of the Hybrid Court of South Sudan.

Thus, Article 1.1 under Chapter V of the above Agreement provides that upon inception of the Agreement, the Transitional Government of National Unity of the Republic of South Sudan (TGoNU) shall initiate legislation for the establishment of the following transitional justice institutions, inter alia, an independent hybrid judicial body, to be known as the Hybrid Court for South Sudan (HCSS) (see; Article 1.1.2). This Article, therefore, establishes the Hybrid Court.

As provided for in the Agreement, the main purpose of the Hybrid Court is to try the following crimes: Genocide (see; Article 3.2.1.1); Crimes Against Humanity (see; Article 3.2.1.2); War Crimes (see; Article 3.2.1.3); and Other serious crimes under international law and relevant laws of the Republic of South Sudan including gender based crimes and sexual violence (see; Article 3.2.1.4).

Enshrining crimes of Genocide; Crimes Against Humanity; and War crimes in the Hybrid Court for South Sudan indicates the intention of the framers of the Agreement who might want to domesticate the ICC Statute by implication. It should be noted that to adopt the general criminal principles in dealing with crimes in South Sudan is not a bad idea as long as it contributes to lasting peace.

However, the question we must answer before endorsing the idea of modern Criminal Justice in South Sudan is, can its adoption as envisaged in Article 3 of the Agreement Chapter V bring the lasting peace in South Sudan?

The answer to this question is negative. It cannot bring lasting peace or even temporarily halt the conflict because of the following reasons:—

First, the conflict in South Sudan is not normal conflict that may warrant criminal prosecution in the modern sense as understood in the West. But South Sudanese conflict is political violence. In this regard, political violence means the conflict perpetrated by either persons or governments to achieve political goals. Therefore, the solution to political violence is political settlement.

In political violence, criminal prosecution is not desirable as what is needed is political justice. Political justice is achieved through political agreement to meet political goals accompanied by reparations to the victims.

This implies that Criminal Prosecution as provided for under Chapter V of the Agreement is unrealistic as one of the methods of solving conflict in South Sudan.

Second, the proposed criminal prosecution to address crimes committed in the process of the war in South Sudan may not be effective for some reasons. What makes it ineffective and illusive in addressing human rights violations is that, it contemplates the prosecution of the President of South Sudan and other government officials.

Thus, under Chapter V of the Agreement, it is provided that a person, who planned, instigated, ordered, committed, aided and abetted, conspired or participated in a joint criminal enterprise in the planning, preparation or execution of a crime shall be individually responsible for the crime (see; Article 3.2.1).

The use of the words as “…a person, who planned, instigated, ordered, committed, aided and abetted, conspired or participated in a joint criminal enterprise in the planning, preparation or execution of a crime shall be individually responsible for the crime” implies the principle of command responsibility and because of that the president of South Sudan, Dr. Riek Machar and other army generals both in the oppositions and the government are all eligible to be prosecuted under the Hybrid Court in South Sudan.

The question is, it is feasible?

Of Course, it is not. Therefore, before adopting the Hybrid Court in South Sudan, the following questions must be answered: if prosecutions begin, where do they end? Should only the leadership be brought to justice? Should bureaucrats, judiciary personnel, members of police and security forces, members of the media, the medical profession, all of whom are often duplicitous in authoritarian regimes, be eligible for prosecution? Can a state finance such an endeavor?

Will the members of the elite allow themselves to be dragged through a criminal or civil proceeding? Will prosecutions ensure that future leaders do a better job covering up abuses so as not be subject to the same?

How will these prosecutions help a society move forward when a system is consumed with the past? How does a society prevent witch hunts and the guarantee of due process for those under prosecution?

If it is the military that’s the target of prosecutions, then there exists the threat of a coup in order for military leaders to protect themselves. Also, if only the top leaders, those who gave the orders, are prosecuted, then the junior officers, those who carried out the bloody orders, will move into top military positions, which may put us into uncertainty in relation to military.

Is criminal prosecution as we see in the case of Rwanda appropriate in South Sudan?

If the above questions are not properly answered and the typical criminal justice is hastily adopted as a method of conflict resolution in South Sudan, then there is likelihood that the future of South Sudan will be jeopardized.

Hence, instead of achieving lasting peace, the country may find itself in worse situations than what we are trying to deal with now. This means that there is a need for rethinking criminal justice as an approach to South Sudanese conflict resolution mechanism.

The criminal prosecution as was seen in the case of Rwanda is not applicable in South Sudan. This is because unlike Rwanda where the new government was already in place when the Court was being established, in the case of South Sudan, it is the same government, which is accused of human rights violations is the one expected to implement the provisions on the Hybrid Court, which is fallacy.

Entrusting the Government with the duty to prosecute herself is a mere dream that will never be realized in South Sudan. The president and other government officials and military will never accept to implement the provisions of the Hybrid Court in accordance with its spirit.

This is because the situation in South Sudan is different from that were prevailing in Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

As already pointed out above, the Hybrid Courts that were established both in Rwanda and Former Yugoslavia were able to operate effectively because by the time they were established, there were already New Governments in place.

Therefore, the New Governments were able to cooperate with the Hybrid Courts in surrendering the perpetuaters of human rights abuses during the Rwandan Genocide and the conflict in Yugoslavia.

In South Sudan, however, the government will never accept to willingly surrender the accused to the Hybrid Court as the accused are part of the government unless it is forced to do so.

Nonetheless, forcing the Government externally to submit to court can be categorized as an assault on South Sudan sovereignty contrary to Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter, 1945.

In addition, invading the country externally to force the government and its officials to surrender the culprits will be further throw South Sudan into even more chaos given the fact that a bulk of the members of our communities stand behind their own leaders.

For the above reasons, if the force is used against the government to obey Court orders then given the nature and mentality of the majority members of South Sudanese communities, there will be all out war between the invaders and the communities where leader comes from.

This means that in case of President Kiir and Riek Machar and any other personality from other tribes in South Sudan they cannot be prosecuted successfully without risking the country falling into further but more serious crises.

However if the government is still in power but not forced to implement the provisions on the Hybrid Court, then justice will never be done to the victims of human rights abuses. Hence, the government will remain operating as it was doing in the past and the country will continue being the same situation with no reforms.

What are needed in South Sudan are comprehensive reforms, which means that there is a need for safe transition that will help introduce strong democracy in South Sudan. This implies that the issues of criminal prosecution should be minimized, and instead, there is a need for dialogue with the President and other government officials to ensure that they accept reforms as we desire to see in South Sudan.

Apart from the above external issues that makes Hybrid Court undesirable, the provisions establishing the Hybrid Courts are not comprehensive enough to cover the human rights abuses that occurred before 15 December 2013. Article 3.1.1 under Chapter V of the 15 August 2015 Agreement provides, the Court shall be established by the African Union Commission to investigate and prosecute individuals bearing the responsibility for violations of international law and/or applicable South Sudanese law, committed from 15 December 2013 through the end of the Transitional Period.

As seen above, the Hybrid Court is incompetent to investigate and try the crimes committed before 15 December 2013. What those who formulated this position of law should have put into consideration is the fact that the killings on 15 December 2013 was between Dinka and Nuer. This means that the conflict is historical nature, which is the continuation of the massive killings that have been going between Nuer and Dinka between 1980s and 1990s.

In 1990s, there were mass massacres of Bor people under the Command of Dr. Riek Machar when he broke away from the SPLM/A mainstream in 1990. Unfortunately, when the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was signed between South and the North of Sudan, the human rights abuses were not addressed.

It should be noted that the failure to address the human rights violations that occurred during the conflict between SPLM/A and the Khartoum and its affiliated militias from 1983-2005 provided for the fertile ground for future massacres. The 2013 massacres of the members of the Nuer community in Juba and the killings of Dinka people afterwards in the three States of Jonglei, Unity and Upper Nile was caused by the failure to address the first human rights violation.

In respect to the above, if the Hybrid Court were to be established to address human rights violations in South Sudan, the timeline for the crimes to be investigated and tried should stretch back to 1990s. In addition, the Hybrid Court should have also contemplated investigating the conflicts between Nuer and Dinka Youths and among Dinka youth themselves and if possible try them as well. This is because these conflicts have been claiming thousands of lives since 2005 to date.

However, the weakness with the present contemplated Hybrid Court in South Sudan is that it will not address the violations of Human Rights that have been committed since 1990s or even before that. For these reasons, the people of South Sudan and in particular Nuer and Dinka will never be satisfied that justice has been done.

When people are not satisfied with justice, the chances of the future conflict reoccurring are high. In order to prevent the future conflict from reoccurring and at the same time ensuring the permanent peace, the dialogue, truth telling and reconciliation should be the way forward in South Sudan. The people obey the law not because of force but for the morals they attach to the law.

In regard to the safeguard of the rights of the Victims, Witnesses and the Accused, the standards differ. Article 3.4.1 of the Establishment of Hybrid Court under Chapter V provides that the HCSS shall implement measures to protect victims and witnesses in line with applicable international laws, standards and practices. While Article 3.4.2 under the same Chapter provides that the rights of the accused shall be respected in accordance to applicable laws, standards and practices.

The question is what, are these applicable laws, standards and practices, why not using the same language as in the case of the victims. Why? The difference in languages provided in the two provisions creates the difference in protection in regard to the protection of the accused. Besides, it is ambiguous and should be ratified.

Article 3.5.5 of the Agreement under Chapter V may be interpreted to have been intended to target the government officials and their subordinates only. This by implication excludes rebel commanders and their subordinates. Article 3.5.5 provides, “No one shall be exempted from criminal responsibility on account of their official capacity as a government official, an elected official or claiming the defence of superior orders”.

The fact that it specifically and expressly points out the government officials and those who took orders from them make it clear that the government officials are the target however excluding rebels and their commanders indicate that those who drafted the agreement were bias. The language of the Agreement should clearly mention both rebels and the government.

In summary, the criminal justice as found under the International Criminal Court Statute or as proposed under the Hybrid Court cannot. This is because the conflict in South Sudan is political violence which needs political settlement and the type of justice needed in South Sudan is restorative justice given the nature of injustices. The injustices committed in South Sudan are not pure criminal injustices but they are political injustices that have resulted into poverty and political violence, lack of confidence and distrust.

NB//: the author can be reached through: juoldaniel@yahoo.com

Justice under Fire: The Dismissal of 13 Justices & Judges from the Judiciary of South Sudan

By Tong Kot Kuocnin, LLB (Juba), LLM(Nairobi), Specialist in Law, Governance & Democracy, University of Nairobi.
JUL/15/2017, SSN;

One is not surprised at all to hear and see the dismissal of the honorable justices and judges from the judiciary of South Sudan by the president.

As the justices and judges went on an open strike two months ago protesting against the leadership of the honorable Chief Justice and requesting the head of state to remove him from office for his failure to manage the judiciary effectively, and efficiently, the men and women of honor faced the wrath of the misdeeds of the president and his in-law, justice Chan Reec Madut.

It is not unknown to all South Sudanese what the intentions of both men is regarding this great institution of ours.

It is not a new thing either to be surprised that innocent justices and judges can be dismissed from the Judiciary especially those who are opposed to the chief justice’s corrupt and dictatorial tendencies.

The first victim, a man of honor was justice Ruben Madol Arol, the former deputy chief justice who’s unlawfully removed from office simply because he asked the chief justice to excuse himself from the bench since the litigants were no longer enjoying any trust and confidence in him in presiding over the case brought before the constitutional panel in the Supreme Court challenging the order of the president which created the 28 states at the time.

Hitherto, the repeat of unlawful removable of the senior justices and judges occurred again simply because they have demanded what rightfully belongs to them.

In this article therefore, I shall not waste time narrating the ordeal these justices and judges went through under the embattled chief justice who took over from his predecessor, Late Justice Prof. John Wuol Makec but I shall labor to bring to the forefront, whether or not, the dismissal of the honorable justices and judges has met the constitutional and statutory requirements and procedures laid down under the Transitional constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 (Amended 2015) and other subsidiary legislations governing the conduct, appointment and removable of the justices and judges of the judiciary of South Sudan.

There are quite a number of statute laws in this country dealing with how the judiciary of South Sudan should be governed, giving effect to the constitution which is the fundamental law of the land.

First and foremost, the transitional constitution provides under Article 123(1) that judicial power is derived from the people and shall be exercised by courts in accordance with customs, values, norms and aspirations of the people and in conformity with the constitution and the law.

This succinctly means that the power lies not in the chief justice and not the president either to do whatever they like with regards to this great institution.

The chief justice is a mere administrator who should run and supervise the officers of the judiciary in accordance with procedures which have clearly been stipulated in legislations governing the judiciary itself.

However, Article 123(2) stipulate further that judicial power shall be vested in an independent institution to be known as the judiciary, but nothing is said about chief justice having a power to tell the president to dismiss any justice or a judge as an officer of the judiciary.

The president as a head of state exercises the power given to him by law not Chan Reec to remove the justices and judges only on grounds of gross misconduct, incompetence and incapacity and upon the recommendation of the National Judicial Commission as provided for under Article 135(2) of the Transitional Constitution, 2011(Amended 2015), which in this case, the national judicial service commission hasn’t sat and made any recommendation for the dismissal and removable of any of the justices and judges of the judiciary of South Sudan.

This clearly puts justice under fire as the chief justice who is also an uncle to the president’s wife, an in-law for that matter, scooped for himself powers which aren’t defined in the constitution and any other legislation governing the management of the judiciary.

Hence, by relegating and compromising the independence of the judiciary, it has been made a private family business enterprise.

On the same token, the Judicial Service Council’s Act, 2008 provides under section 7(e) that the Council has the power to recommend appointments, promotions and removable of justices and judges in accordance with the provisions of Judiciary Act, 2008.

But more interestingly, section 8(2) provides that council may delegate to the president of the Supreme Court any of its powers and functions; provided that, the council shall NOT delegate its functions over appointments, promotions and removable of justices and judges.

Where on earth the chief justice and the president did get their undefined and unscrupulous powers to unjustly remove these honorable justices and judges from?

The laws are very clear and straight forward. Let us not read our laws, more especially our constitution upside down.

Yes, the president of the Supreme Court can make recommendations to the judicial service council on the removable of justices but such recommendations will be effected only when the council is convened to deliberate, examine and decide on the recommendations in accordance with the provisions of the Judiciary Act, 2008.

Again very clear that the only institution having power to remove justices and judges, is the judicial service council and not the chief justice and the president.

Justice is truly under fire because instead the demands of these justices and judges are addressed, they felt prey in the hands of their colleague who should have stood by their side, conniving with his in-law and a family best friend to dismiss them without following any proper procedure as provided for under the constitution and other laws currently in force in the country.

Justice is under fire as the judiciary remained closed for the last three months with all accused persons in various detention facilities continue experiencing the most inhumane, agonized and brutal ways and manners in which the wardens of those detention facilities treats them.

Justice is under fire as the rule of law is deeply buried and the rule of man reigns high.

These honorable justices and judges became victims not of their own interests but that of all of their colleagues and for the benefit and proper functioning of the entire judiciary of South Sudan, for those sitting in offices now and for the future generations.

His obdurate conduct of the judicial affairs has obfuscated and completely obliterated the prospects of a judiciary in a democratic society.

The judiciary cannot sustain its credibility on its own and win the confidence and trust of the people if the credibility gap grows steadily wider day and night between the institution and the general public and more notably the people whose rights have been violated.

The judiciary which is the last hope to retrieve back those rights is the one that reneged on peoples’ rights, then hostility will eventually ensued and the private citizens will take the law into their own hands.

In conclusion however, it is imperative to conclude that you’re heroes who have been working under president Kiir’s government for the last thirteen years and Chief Chan Reec for the last seven years.

You have undergone all hardships and other turbulent agonies in an attempt to serve your people. I called you heroes because you stood tall and lowered yourselves to deliver justice to those who need it most.

I saluted and commended you for all the tireless efforts you made to deliver justice to those who have been victimized by powerful and wealthy people in this country.

I called you patriots because you haven’t taken up guns to kill innocent lives just to get what you deserved but chose to use democratic means to demand for what is rightfully yours.

Your records speak louder to us who have been on this journey of delivering justice to the paupers with you than what Chan Reec and his in-law have shamelessly done to you.

NDM Statement of the 6th Anniversary of South Sudan Independence

HE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT (NDM)
9th July, 2017
Statement
The 6th Anniversary of Independence

On the 9th July 2011, precisely six years ago the world witnessed the birth of the Republic of South Sudan and welcomed it with tremendous Jubilation amid enormous hopes and expectations by its patriotic citizens, and friends worldwide. The realization of the independence through peaceful conduct of referendum was a collective harvest and efforts made by its people. It demonstrated that with unity of purpose this great nation can conquer mountains of adversities with feverish determination and zeal.

The independence represented a golden opportunity for the people of South Sudan to co- exist peacefully, and to determine their political, social and economic destiny in a stable federal democratic state. It was regarded as the final logical conclusion to one of the longest wars of independence in the African continent. A permanent divorce from the turbulent past that was characterized by violence; gross human rights violations; corruption, impunity and dictatorship.

However, as the nation marks the 6th Anniversary of its independence, a destructive civil war is raging; the economy in ruins, social fabric destroyed, and the country is on the verge of disintegration with no glimpse of hope on the horizon. The Ethno-centric and Kelptocratic regime of Kiir and the ruling SPLM party with its varying acronyms are responsible for the economic, social and political ills confronting South Sudan which resulted from bad-governance, mismanagement of resources and epidemic corruption.

Today rather than celebrating the Independence Day with great festivity and euphoria that it deserves, the people’s conscious and moral righteousness couldn’t entertain such thoughts while knowing that across the country, on the hills, mountains, rivers an forest many of our people are starving and dying in millions and are seeking refuge inside the United Nations protection of Civilians sites (POCs) or in the neighboring countries.

President Kiir and its SPLM political and military elites failed to provide leadership and to establish democratic governance that is a prerequisite for the construction of a viable democratically stable and prosperous nascent state. Bad, inept and uncharismatic leadership in the country coupled with internal contradictions within the SPLM led to unnecessary political bickering plunging the country into violence and catastrophic civil war since 2013.

The signing of the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (ARCISS) in August 2015 represented a rare opportunity to salvage the country from the eventual collapse and provided hope and optimism to the civil population for durable peace and building of a prosperous economy which was destroyed by the civil war. Unfortunately, President Kiir was never interested in implementing the August signed Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (ARCSS). He immediately embarked on a scheme to derail and frustrate the implementation of the Agreement by issuing decrees that were in contravention of the letter and spirit of the ARCISS, culminating in a military confrontation with his main partner to the August Agreement resulting in the collapse and the clinical death of the Peace Agreement. Since then the war has spread all over the country; a natural reaction to the tyrannical and dictatorial regime of Kiir and his Jieng Council of Elders.

The humanitarian situation in South Sudan is dire aggravated by the fact that the government is using food as a weapon and wide spread famine is looming across the county.. Economy is on the verge of collapse as the inflation in South Sudan has reached 900% rendering the currency worthless. Furthermore, the civil servants and soldiers are going without salaries for months, our diplomats are barely surviving and many embassies are facing imminent closure due to lack of rent payments. The state of affairs in the country is deeply troubling in light of soaring cost of living, steady decline in the education and health sector, a staggering number of unemployed youth, rise in crime and violence in Juba and all over the country. While the few corrupt tribal elites continue getting richer at the expense of the destitute majority population, and spending monies on purchasing weapons, women, orphans and the elderly are without food, medicine and shelter. South Sudan now ranks the first in the Fragile State index. The ruling minority clique in Juba and their shady business associates have built a strong kleptocratic system through which money is embezzled, laundered and siphoned out of the country into foreign bank accounts.

The National Democratic Movement (NDM) would like to make it crystal clear that the myriads of challenges confronting our country, South Sudan can’t be resolved through military victories as the dictatorial government in Juba assumes, but rather through a people-centred negotiated peace agreement. Any envisaged peace talks must be inclusive in its nature and scope with wider participation of all stakeholders and address the root causes of the conflict. Presently the August Agreement of the Resolution of Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan has totally collapsed and hence the need for a new political process to stop the unnecessary bleeding, forced displacement, hunger and gross human rights violations becomes exceedingly urgent. Your movement will strive and hand in hand with other like- minded opposition groups to restore the dignity and pride of our country by utilizing all the necessary revolutionary tools at its disposal. On this auspicious occasion, we wish our people well hoping that next year will find our country enjoying genuine peace and stability.

Long live the struggle of our people

Long live South Sudan A luta continua

Amb. Emmanuel Aban For/ the Spokesman
The National Democratic Movement (NDM) Email: ojwokj@hotmail.com

Gen. Paul Malong Awan: A No Nonsense Man who’s Neutered?

By Kharubino Kur Bol, JUL/13/2017, SSN;

The fall of Gen. Paul Malong from the corridors of power to house arrest perfectly defied an apothegm that goes, “the bigger they are, they harder the fall.” Malong was not just a powerful military figure, but he was believed to be the de facto President of South Sudan.

His relationship with the President is dated back 30 years ago. Rumors have it that the once powerful Gen. had once swaggered about his close ties with the President, “I am in Kiir’s throat, he can’t swallow me nor vomit me out; we are intertwined,” brags Malong.

However, his untimely fall left a lot to be desired and we all look forward to seeing pathologists coming out to tell the country the postmortem results of the dead ‘intertwined relationship.’

Ho yes! Amb. Telar was the government’s chief pathologist sent to Malong in Yirol. Can you please tell us something?

Speculatively, the Malong’s superiority complex is among what caused the death of the intertwined relationship.

If there was a great paradox in Kiir’s government, do not think of Micheal Makuei, it is Gen. Malong. He embodied what government supporters need and what they do not need.

He palls the people with equal ease, he charms them to support the government. He influenced major presidential decrees; he fixed his people in every angle of the government, and commanded huge followers than Kiir within the Dinka tribe.

He walked out of Freedom Hall in protest when President Kiir signed Compromised Peace Agreement in 2015. He accepts the truth and rejects the false.

He talks black and white. He is a no nonsense man.

With that charisma, Malong did not know that he has broken law number one of the 48 commandments of power by Robert Greene. In his book called “48 laws of power,” law number one says, “Don’t outshine your master.”

Malong outshone the President and he is neutered.

In his recent portfolio as an army chief, an influential position that some Generals used to breach the constitution and ascend to the presidency by coup, Malong did not strictly stand on the side of law; but stood against anyone who sought to take political capital through the bullet; stood against anyone who sought to kill the citizens and abrogate the constitution.

However, he almost brought to an end the rebellion of Riek — and indeed lamed the rebellion. President Kiir un-deservingly humiliated him at wrong time on illogical accusations concocted by gossip mongers.

To be fair, Gen. Malong was not everyone’s cup of tea. He is a ruthless military leader who believes that the war can be fairly won in the battlefield rather on negotiation table. And this belief earns him thousands of supporters.

The gossip mongers accused him of overflowing ego, Presidential ambition and offensive management of power.

However, with that rank (LT GEN.) of his and his previous experiences in politics, he is already in politics and politics does not often go without ego and ambition. Less than that, you are ordinary.

They also accused him of overstretching his hands farther than they were meant to be, and biting off more than he can chew.

Leave it or take it, Malong has won the admiration of many South Sudanese especially when he heeded the calls of his friends and the hoi polloi to return to Juba. This is a rare demonstration of leadership.

Though he was ignominiously neutered by the President and intimidated by some junior officers, Malong accepted to come to Juba for the interest of South Sudanese irrespective of their tribes and political affiliations.

With his unabated leadership aplomb, Malong didn’t lambast the government for placing him under house arrest nor did he forcefully demand for his release to go for medication in abroad. He is just suffering in a silent mode.

Do not shoot the messenger — I am just telling you the truth. Malong Awan is not AWAN. Malong knows ‘LONG’, he stands and lives by ‘law’. He is not as sly as fox; he knows law as Justice Chan Reech Madut.

He is a good and honorable man. He is temperate and thoughtful. He is not a power hungry dude. His demeanor shows a man who understands the laws and cannot misuse the army to advance his political interest___, which I believed he has none.

He does not throw bombs, or speak haphazardly and his recent serenity not to respond to reckless and antagonizing statements uttered several times by the government against him bears the witness.

As a soldier, he is a follower of Sun Tzu, a famous Chinese military strategist who taught his followers to choose their fights carefully; Know whom they are fighting and why.

In addition, know their options in fight. Therefore, Malong did not choose to fight and that is why he returned to Juba in defiance of all odds.

His exit from Juba had shaken the whole nation to the core and put all people in panic.

However, the patriotic Malong was not scheming for rebellion but to let the country know that the President is being held hostage by the gossip mongers and is running the country under their influences.

It is clear now that the witch’s brew of gossiping in J-1 will sooner than later throw South Sudan into the abyss.

On 12th of May, President Kiir unwittingly accepted that he embraces the rumors more than realities. “I was receiving reports about Malong almost every hour of people telling me things which I knew Malong was not doing. This was becoming a routine talk and it was like I was not listening to them,” Kiir cacophonously added.

“I made the changes because I wanted to see what the people coming with reports about him will have to say again.”

This misbegotten practice by our politicians to gossip against their colleagues in order to register their allegiances and trust of the President is primeval politics of 21st century. Nevertheless, it is the perceived reality in the SPLM.

The President sacked Gen. Malong because of this kind of politicking. This gossipy political creed will set this nation on the precipice if the President does not discard it soon.

However, the President seems loath to learn from his astronomical blunders of embracing gossiping. He drops a clanger after a clanger, and learns nothing. The blunders of 2013 should have served as his lessons.

In conclusion, today Gen. Malong is two months old in Juba under house arrest since he returned from Yirol. It is now upon President Kiir to genuinely reconcile with Malong, forget the past and move on.

Or else, he keeps Malong under house arrest till he, Malong, sneaks out of Juba and uses his detention as an accuse for launching a rebellion.

It is true that in politics, there is no friend but an ally; President Kiir should bring Malong back into government and teach him the table manners.

The writer is reachable via kharubino83@gmail.com

The South Sudanese Former Detainees (FD) are just Spectators of the ongoing conflicts in South Sudan

BY: John Adoor Deng, Australia, JUL/10/2017, SSN;

The South Sudanese Former Political Detainees (FD) also referred to, as G-10 are not, in my view, helping in the flagging situation in South Sudan, although I was initially, to some extent, their mild supporter right from the onset, when they were in jail. Readers can attest to the article I wrote, published in South Sudan news sites where I referred to them (FD) as biblical Meshach, Abednego, and Shadrack who survived the wrath of the Babylonian king.

Unlike the Israelite resilience men who stood the great temptation of the time and feared none, the South Sudanese Former Detainees are just spectators of the ongoing conflicts in South Sudan.

Upon their painfully release, they cowardly turned their backs to those who fiercely and fully advocated for their release including Dr Riek Machar, Madam Rebecca de Mabior and all South Sudanese who fought hard mounting pressures to condition their release, alive and healthy.

Unfortunately, on their release, they miscalculated events at hand thinking that they will through this crisis take on the leadership of the country. They had believed that the region and international community would rein in to install one of them as a leader has not facilitated in the conflict.

In their view, Kiir and Machar were going to be bad people in the eyes of the international community. Of course, circumstances have now taught them otherwise, Dr Machar, despite difficulties facing him each day has continued to grow in his popularity and so is President Kiir’s tact in Juba despite declining public support for him.

Thus, I have come to realise after a lengthy look at their daily utterances how they wanted to remain as separate political unit called FD or G-10 without playing an active part in bringing about peace to the Republic of South Sudan.

In my view, they are a failed, insignificant forum who wanted to be regarded as “holy men” who played no part in the conflict, forgetting that they ironically work harder to ignite this conflict in the context of the press conference of the 6th of December 2013.

In its entirety, this forum (FD/G-10) should not continue to exist, they either disintegrate or join one party among the current political actors (NAS, IG, IO Bush, IO Juba and other political and civil forces) helping in trying to wage peace in the country.

The reasoning here is widely informed by the following:-

1. FD or call them G-10 have no central position. They act in some forums as a solid body but in other forums, as distinctive particles to each other. For example, we have seen how a portion of them rallied behind a position that calls for UN 10-year Trusteeship of South Sudan. On the other hands, we have seen those of Dr Majak calling for regime change through the installation of a Technocratic Government (TG) while their allied Foreign Minister Mr. Deng Abor, is on their opposite selling President Kiir’s policies and exerting no solidarity with his colleagues in the diaspora.

2. They exerted no influence, internally or externally, but are a bunch of lonely disgruntled leaders trekking in the bushes unarmed. Internally, they have no sizable following among the South Sudanese both in the diaspora, displaced and inside South Sudan. Externally, they have become lobbyists like a civil society with no significant gain. For example, they have hosted numerous meetings with regional leaders, international bodies but nothing so far has materialised in their favour.

3. They are an exclusive forum; in that, nobody can join them unless one was jailed with them in Juba, they have no agenda and a suitable platform to engage South Sudanese who are thirsty for meaningful political dispensation.

Although most of them have a fascinating historical background in terms of their sacrifices in the 21 years conflict, they have in recent development become politically ambivalent and opportunistic.

In order to redeem their good selves, the FD must rethink their political position or opt to become what the Dinka people call “Jong Abuthic”, meaning a dog who waited in hiding for an offer that never came through till it saw its death shadow. END

The Writer is John Adoor Deng, Author of the book entitled: The Politics of Ethnicity and Governance in South Sudan. He can be reach on dengjohn780@gmail.com