Dr. John Garang and question of South Sudan founding father: A reply to Elhag Paul

BY: Manyok Chuol, OTTAWA, CANADA, JAN/12/2013, SSN;

Elhag Paul, the prolific opinion writer and anti-Dinka activist, wrote an article which South Sudan Nation Website published on Jan/ 03/2013. Mr. Paul’s article is entitled: Is there anti-Dinka school of thought in South Sudan as claimed by Joseph Garang of New Sudan Vision? and this commentary is my respond to it. As in almost all the author’s previous articles, two key sentiments have pervaded again: anti-Dinka tirade and Dr. John Garang vis-a’-vis the question of founding father of South Sudan. The two are the only issues I’m responding to.

South Sudanese who have read most of Mr. Paul’s articles will have probably come to the same conclusion, as I have, that this writer harbors deep-seated anti-Dinka sentiments. It’s now also more apparent that Mr. Paul various attempts at denigration of Dr. John Garang and his legacy is in fact a subset of the author’s overall revulsion of the Jieng (Dinka).

I will only respond in detail to Elhag Paul’s argument against Dr. John Garang’s well-deserved and earned-most importantly, the recognition of Founding Father of South Sudan shortly. But Mr. Elhag Paul’s denunciations of the Jieng (Dinka) engender grave danger in South Sudan; I will only respond in passing because others have already advised him against his mis-characterizations and incitement against the Dinka. Unfortunately, Mr. Paul is obstinately impermeable still to their wise counsel.

Anti-Dinka diatribe versus legitimate government criticism
The Rt. Hon. James Wani Igga, Speaker of South Sudan Legislative Assembly, on 30th October 2012 cogently said, during his discussion with South Sudanese in Ottawa, Canada, that, “if we don’t bury tribalism, tribalism will bury us.”

But Elhag Paul, the inventor of the so-called Dinkocracy and associated paregmenon has consistently failed to see this abyss. He uses his right as South Sudanese to criticize the government as ruse to deplore the Jieng as he similarly incites other tribes against it.
Flaunting vanity aside, and I have no problem with it, Mr. Paul should expect South Sudanese to deserve better than the cheap but dangerous incitements he consistently propagandizes about in his articles.

If or when the other tribes rise up against the Dinka as is the goal of Elhag Paul, what is certain is that the Jieng will be forced to defend their collective right to existence and it would be utterly disastrous for our country if tribes fight each other in the way Mr. Paul envisions. By inciting tribes against a tribe, Mr. Elhag Paul should no longer claim to love South Sudan when his work can probably bring about a destruction of the country.

Let me be absolutely unequivocal and affirm that all citizens, including Elhag Paul, reserve the right to criticize the SPLM and the Government of South Sudan as national institutions. This is a right I have personally and numerously exercised. It’s unconscionable and totally unacceptable that citizens have lost their lives in exercise of this right. Isaiah Abraham killing sadly comes to mind and I fully hold the government responsible unless it comes clean but hoodwinking the public remains wholly deplorable.

Therefore, you can see this isn’t about denying Elhag Paul the exercise of such right; the issue really is the cowardly deliberate incitement of ordinary citizens against their compatriots, disguised as government criticism. All citizens reserve the right to criticize the government or the SPLM party regardless of tribe but Elhag Paul coaches his criticisms of national institutions in purely anti-Dinka rhetoric.

Such approach portends danger which Mr. Paul claims to be dispelling in the first place. There is a difference between an institution and an individual and indeed a difference exists between an individual and a tribe. Salva Kiir is an individual and also a Dinka (the tribe) in the same way that he is a South Sudanese national.

The government in Juba is for all South Sudanese. But Mr. Paul would not hold the government solely responsible as a governing national institution. Instead, he holds all Jieng guilty by association for government failures because the president is a Dinka!

But let’s also remember that President Salva Kiir is a South Sudanese national and if we are to start holding communities collectively responsible for shortcomings of individuals, Mr. Paul should use the same yardstick and hold all South Sudanese, including himself, guilty by association for their government failures as the presidency and government have a South Sudanese national association/identity.

But I say, let us not hold tribes guilty by association just because a national leader happens to be from a certain tribe. Let us therefore not hold all Jieng collectively responsible for the failures of a few. I also recognize that there may be tribalist Dinka leaders in government and such leaders should be condemned individually for abusing the public trust but it’s quite a stretch to extrapolate and suggest that all Jieng/Dinkas are tribalists for which the rest of South Sudanese must be incited against.

Let us not divide South Sudanese along tribal lines when we criticize the government. Instead, let us unite as South Sudanese in calling for reforms and an end to corruption in government as we should equally remain united in our quest for justice, equality, and prosperity – collectively as South Sudanese.

As I have stated in my opening sentences above, Elhag Paul has also on various occasions tried to put Dr. Garang’s unassailable place in our nation’s history as Founding Father of South Sudan in some kind of disrepute. Such attempts should be understood – correctly, I think, in the context of the author’s overall anti-Dinka disposition.

Dr. John Garang and the question of the founding father of South Sudan
Despite much of Mr. Paul’s objection to our nation’s recognition of Dr. John Garang as its founding father is possibly driven by his discernible abhorrence of Jieng, I continue – still – to willfully ignore all that and patiently await Mr. Paul reasons for his opposition, when he gives them.

In opposing Dr. John Garang’s being appropriately recognized as the Founding Father of South Sudan, Elhag Paul does not independently state his views or reasons in the article. He, however, chooses to grossly misrepresent the views of Dr. John Garang’s eldest son, Mabior Garang, in another interview which Mr. Paul referred to. After misrepresenting Mabior Garang’s views to affirm his biased opinions, Mr. Paul went on to forcefully claim:

“It should by now be clear [from Mabior Garang’s views which by now have been mischaracterized by Elhag Paul] to Joseph Deng Garang and those people who tirelessly try to elevate the late leader of SPLM/A into father of the nation that their consistent assertions are futile… So Dr Garang is not and can not (sic) be father of the nation he did not want to be born.”

This quoted part is the central argument/response of Elhag Paul to Joseph Deng Garang, a friend and a colleague of many years, who I surely don’t agree with his characterization of Justin Ambago as anti-Dinka. I hope readers will overlook the very many incongruencies contained in the article but carefully look at the fallacy of the central claim that “Dr Garang is not and can not (sic) be father of the nation he did not want to be born.”

Such is a claim of a person who harbors an agenda and is possibly impervious to rational arguments. I still wonder, nevertheless, how any honest and serious person can make a claim so audacious that it risked becoming utterly absolutist and to the extent facts could no longer corroborate or would seem to matter!

Those who have read Mr. Paul’s article will have noticed how his central claim was made through a sheer impulsive urge rather than through a reasoned presentation.

Let’s now, therefore, ask the question who a founding father is anyway. A founding father is widely recognized as a person who has established an important organization or idea or as one Wikipedia entry broadly defines national founding fathers as:
[T]ypically those who played an influential role in setting up the systems of governance, (i.e. political system form of government, and constitution), of the country. They can also be military leaders of a war of independence that led to the existence of the country [emphasis is mine].

Therefore, let’s examine and put the founding of South Sudan into this context and we will understand why Dr. John Garang is our nation’s indestructible Founding Father.

Established an important organization and fought in the war of independence
I fully recognize the important contributions of generations of leaders throughout our history, whether of political or military leaders, or of our chiefs and indeed ordinary citizens.

I’m not here to denigrate our people’s contributions or sacrifices; instead I’m here to defend a record of a man who led our people with brilliance and extraordinary skills. This man is our late leader and hero, the indomitable Dr. John Garang de Mabior.

Dr. John Garang fought alongside his South Sudanese compatriots in Anya Nya (I) and was absorbed into the Sudanese army following the Addis Ababa Agreement of 1972. When Sudan’s President Nimeiry abrogated that agreement, John Garang with his colleagues including our current President, Salva Kiir, rebelled and formed the SPLM/A in 1983.

And because I’m not writing the biography of Dr. John Garang or indeed the SPLM/A, I only give you this brief history to show a lifelong sacrifice that Dr. Garang had lived fighting on behalf of his people and why he has been appropriately accorded his place as our nation’s founding father.

For 21 long years, the SPLM/A fought successive Khartoum-based regimes and came out victorious against many odds. In 2005, the SPLM which Elhag Paul now so derisively calls the Oyee Party negotiated a unique peace agreement. Unfortunately, Elhag Paul chooses to befuddle his followers who together now believe in imagined inevitability of South Sudan achieving independence without the contribution of the SPLM, including that of its late indefatigable leader, the shrewd and charismatic Dr. John Garang.

The CPA is an obviously historic achievement and many people including honest South Sudanese who do not belong to or support the SPLM recognize such feat. Only to Elhag Paul must this deed be ridiculed, downplayed, obscured and/or even denied.

But I remind Elhag Paul, despite suspecting that envy and loath of the Dinka are probably suffocating him, that the late SPLM leader negotiated the historic CPA, the peace agreement that virtually guaranteed the birth of a new nation in South Sudan. To claim Dr. John Garang did not want South Sudan born, a claim I have shown to be false, is a dangerous exhibition of willful ignorance or worst still a terrible case of amnesia on Mr. Paul’s part.

Not only is Elhag Paul’s claim mendacious, it may be revealing much of the unworthiness of Dr. Garang’s doubters of his founding father tribute.

Birth of a new nation in South Sudan
The nation of South Sudan gained independence through a plebiscite in exercise of the Right of Self-Determination, the overarching part of the 2005 CPA. All should be reminded, however, that the right of self-determination is not a concept original to South Sudan’s leaders contrary to the balderdash claim of the 28th August 1991 Nasir Coup leaders and their facts-free followers.

If the right of self-determination is not a creation of our leaders, then those who loudly claim they were the first to call for the right of self-determination, and without working hard for it, should recognize the achievement of those who actually fought and brought the independence of South Sudan.

Dr. John Garang and the SPLM crafted the CPA with skills and knowledge of the enemy and this unique peace agreement directly resulted in South Sudanese exercising the right of self-determination through the 9th January 2011 referendum vote in which our people so overwhelmingly voted for separation leading to the proclamation of independence on 9th July 2011.

The question, therefore, is: how can the late SPLM/A leader and the chief architect of CPA not be the founding father of South Sudan? If he cannot be, who else would as Elhag Paul is not admittedly opposed to South Sudan having a founding father?

How can resentment and jealousy so flagrantly scapegoat in such a way that would allow a person of apparent intelligence in Elhag Paul to make a decidedly bogus claim that Dr. Garang did not want South Sudan born when a schooled and objective reading of the CPA makes it abundantly clear that the SPLM and its late leader wanted South Sudan achieve independence.

It is for these reasons that Dr. John Garang is duly recognized as South Sudan founding father even as it irritates Elhag Paul.

In closing, Dr. John Garang was a visionary of immense intellect and political skills who outwitted his detractors in life. But it is astounding that the late SPLM leader continues to defeat his opponents even in death!

By: Manyok Chuol, Ottawa, Canada

23 Comments

  1. Choromke Jas says:

    Reports reaching Juba from Kenya and Uganda, where there are sizeable number of “Sudanese” (meaning Dinka) is that the populations in those countries are fed up with the Sudanese. In fact, some have started the campaign of refusing to let their houses for rent to the Sudanese for several reasons: one is that Sudanese are arrogant and prone to unprovoked violence.
    In Juba, the general understanding is that the majority of the beneficiaries of the government corruption are Dinka. Among those who rob and sometimes kill people (including foreign nationals) are suspected to be Dinka. Those who own and drive the V8’s, exotic models of cars are suspected to be Dinka. Of course this does not justify generalized accusations against the Dinka as a people.
    However, public opinions do not have such a luxury of nuanced consideration as those who are informed on natural justice and guilt by associations.
    Because of this public posture we have had the genocide in Rwanda and the 2007/2008 electoral violence in Kenya (mostly directed against the Kikuyu). The Jieng intellectuals have their jobs cut out: they need to educate their population on the need to respect the rights of other fellow citizens and to behave with decorum when abroad.
    Mrs Garang once said somewhere that if he had lived, Dr Garang would have voted for unity! Just a question: did his death come about because some powerful people (in the wider world) might have believed that he was a real unionist?

  2. Thiang Geka says:

    You’re a liar, Manyok Chol! (Don’t say Chuol or is it your pen-name?) Elhag Paul is a nationalist who writes the truth against the tribalized system of government. This truth is not only known in Juba by South Sudanese alone but also worldwide, didn’t you listen to BBC African-Debate of last month? In which Dinka was accused of having dominated the Juba government and doing things tribally. Dr. Just Guest Dramatically was until the last minute fighting against Juba and for Khartoum, even now where his soul is located in heaven is a direction of Khartoum. Equally, those of 18 and 28 August respectively fought against Khartoum and for Juba up to the last step two years back. So, genuine history and people of South Sudan themselves will be the only Judges of the question who did what or be termed a FOUNDING FATHER.
    Elhag Paul and many other writers should continue advocating against bad and tribal practices involves in governance. Thanks for that!

  3. Kuot says:

    Thiang, just remember you n your counterpart Nyagat called Elhag Paul aka David de Chand, will never succeed to fit in the traitors who deserted South Sudan for bribery n servitude in Khartoum. Let’s see which parliament you will stand up and convince us that Dr. John Garang de Mabior is not a father of the Republic of South Sudan. In addition to being the architect of the CPA that yielded RSS, Dr. John Garang had been directing the SPLA to liberate uncountable towns in S. Sudan.
    Who else dislodged Arabs in S. Sudan that deserves to replace Dr. Garang as the father of South Sudan?
    Good enough, you r only advocates in websites. No one should worry about the rhetoric incited by traitors through the Internet.

  4. Mony jang says:

    What normally illustrated ur worst comment, is by commenting without respecting John Garang who let u to talk as South Sudanese.

  5. Mony jang says:

    What is wrong with his name? Do u want to rename him?

  6. Dan says:

    Thiang, remember Dinka and Nuer shared a lot of names especially the ones at the borders. Chuol is his real last name. I know him well and some of your Nuer boys who are his friends will tell you the same thing.

  7. Thiang Geka says:

    Kuot and Mony Jang! History is obvious and is the only parliament to tell because John Garang killed Southerners– the separatists e g Joseph Oduho. Garang was a unionist and died as a unionist. De Chand is not my counterpart and I don’t know even if he should be the same person as Elhag Paul, this is your tactic that you want to divert the point. You (mony jangs who were around Garang) are/were always terming all separatists who were opposing your idea to have our current Juba Government in Khartoum as Nyagats. But, the good news was that you were forced by these Nyagats now in Juba to signed peace and to separation altogether by giving you oil and drink upto maximun degree, for we wanted you only to say the very important word “separation!” so you said it.

    Should this mean that a unionist who died for Khartoum be named a FOUNDING FATHER or a separatist Joseph Oudho who died for Juba? Some Mony Jangs were for Juba, don’t generalize. Note. What you said today as Garang’s boy will be totally different to what the history writes!

  8. Kenyi Alex says:

    Kuot,
    Adoring and Worshiping Late Hero Dr. John Garang indefinably can not and will not solve the problems of South Sudan.
    How should you have said this;
    “Who else dislodged Arabs in S. Sudan that deserves to replace Dr. Garang as the father of South Sudan?” As if we got the independence through liberation only. Was John Garang there during referendum voting? Didn’t we get our independence after his departure? Do we need Late Hero to come back and change the current political blunder? Did he lead our National Army to Panthou?

    I agree with you on Late Dr. Garang being a Hero and a Liberator, But seriously disagree with you on Late Garang being a Founding Father of this Nation because he came when the liberation was in existence. He led the second phase of the the war only not a founder.

    I also disagree with those who call him a unionist! No, read about Biafora and Katanga wars of secession in Nigeria and Congo Kinshasa respectively. African Nationalism by Samba
    In a nut shell he was a disguised separationist.

  9. Thiang Geka says:

    Garang would have wanted me to comment as a Sudanese not a South Sudanese!

  10. Kuot says:

    You are a bunch of liars. Dr. John Garang did not kill separatists because they were fighting for independence of South Sudan. They were killed by the SPLA forces because they were attacking from behind the liberators who were fighting to capture Jekow and other garrisons occupied by Arabs. None of the so-called separatists had been stopped and killed while liberating Nasir, Malakal, Jekow etc.
    In fact, all the traitors you mentioned were killed because they were singing separation but fighting their own brothers who were liberating S. Sudan.
    Thiang, mentioning Joseph Oduho as a victim of separation really portrayed you as a Nyagat and a liar. Joseph Oduho and CDR Kwac Kang were killed together by SPLA forces in Panyagoor, Twic East County. Obviously, they were there as enemies of South Sudan people. There is no reason for separatists to occupy Panyagoor by force and hope that they will escape untouched.
    Second there were no Arab soldiers there in Twic East county. They were killed as a revenge for the massacre they masterminded in Twic East, Duk, n Bor after Nasir declaration.

  11. Thiang Geka says:

    I realized you are just crying, Manyok Chol (Kuot), because you n Garang wished to be in Khartoum but you found yourselves unfortunately in Juba and heaven respectively. Yes, this is how politics works, camp A can defeat camp B. Don’t you remember Dr Just Guess’s statment in 1983 that, “All the Southern Sudanese separatists have to be killed before Arabs,” whom he (garang) called his brothers in the North citing the saying “anyone you share an interest with is your friend,” which implied that Arabs and Mabior wanted united Sudan so they were pals.
    Dear Manyok, the war which was fought in every corner on this planet (i.e. in Twic East, London, Raja, Torit and Yambio etc) was between the Southern separatists and unionists, once you get yourselves in one place as Southern Sudanese and have two different objectives that is separation and unity you fight.
    That war was being fought until Jan 15th 2011 and its results announced finally on 30 in the same month which box won. So Joseph Oduho’s (who was killed in Twic East near there) Univesity or Father Saterenio Ohure must be found in ten states. Short up! Kuot you have no point to back. Thanks

    • Dan says:

      Kuot, I entirely agreed with you, man. Some of our southern brothers need to be educated about how this independence which most of the people are going hysterical about it. Or should I say that they know the facts, but just trying to deny the huge contribution of this man (John Garang) out of jealousy.

  12. Kuot says:

    Kenyi, give me the name of a person you think can be the father of South Sudan, then we shall compare their performances during the struggle to the time of Independence. Dr. John Garang was not with us when we voted overwhelmingly for the independence but no right minded person will not admit that Dr. Garang put extra effort to ensure S. Sudan gets this independence. Dr. John Garang’s actions speak louder than words. The unity slogan was not his major goal, those south Sudanese who were true liberators knew that Dr. John Garang aim was to liberate S. Sudan. It is only traitors who were changing sides between Khartuom and S. Sudan who did not know the goal of the SPLM/A.

    • Thiang Geka says:

      Kuot! Is your soul with you? How come a human being like Garang could kill those separatists because he wanted separated Sudan? For instance, now Ramciel is proposed to be our national Capital, so there are also those who do not want Ramciel but Juba to remain and be. Based on this, take as an example, Manyok Deng and you (Kuot) want Ramciel against Juba to be the Capital and Thomas and I want Juba to be the one. Could you kill Manyok Deng because he likes what you like? I don’t think so. Otherwise others might look at you as a killer or criminal who kills for no good reasons.
      In 2011 did any one of us who voted for separation kill other brothers/sisters separatists before or after he/she could vote. If not, Kuot, you can agree with me that Dr JGD was doing different things which were not far from “C”lity. The enemy of your enemy is your friend and the reverse is true. And this was the saying Dr Just Guess was citing. Because he was terming those of Joseph Oduhdo his enemy for they were saying. From Nimule to Kosti while Dr Just was crying from Nimule to Wadelfa (in Dongla). If you call separatists who opposed Wad El Faha “traitors” that is your choice but these traitors will continue giving you what you want politically as they awarded Dr Garang a big “F”. That is good news and reality you couldn’t deny. Thanks

  13. Kuot says:

    Thiang,
    you are telling your readers that you have a very low IQ to understand the information i gave U. If any S. Sudanese wants a separation they need to acquire arms and start fighting any Arab who has been deployed or occupied S. Sudan. No person whether you are John Garang, Salva Kiir, or Joseph Lago will kill you for doing that. You only get killed when you acquire arms from Arab and start fighting your brothers in villages and jungles of S. Sudan.
    That is what the traitors you mentioned had been doing. There is nowhere you can pretend to be a separatist and your actions of attacking fellow S. Sudanese is obviously showing the opposite of your words.
    For Example, the first place which were captured by the so-called separatists from Nasir Faction were the villages of Dinka Bor. Malakal was occupied by Arabs and they left them there untouched. It is only traitors or (Nyagat) who were supporting Arabs that can perceive that action of attacking Dinka Bor villages as a search for separation or independence of S. Sudan.
    Your example of Juba and Ramciel is useless, No reason to respond to it. It is an irrelevant example of a low IQ Nyagat.

  14. Mony jang says:

    Thiang Geka, Nuer r good p’ple but normally mislead by stupid p’ple like u.
    No matter what u say, Dr. John Garang still a father of the nation; for the name of Manyok Chuol r real name man, don’t u know Dinka Bor r having Intermarriage with Nuer; what normally separate us with Nuer r stupid p’ple like u.

    • Thiang Geka says:

      Mony janng, we are kicking off the genuine cases historically, so there is no room for insulting my dear, but you can convince not only me by mentioning facts. Garang still the Father of the nation, Mony Jang is this by force or by which mean? Just read the facts of our second civil war Mony jang! Our national flag as an instance was raised up in 2011 by Gen. Salva Kiir Mayardit. Could we say it(flag) was raised by Gen. Salva Mathok Gengdit? Imagine, somebody is saying so, should such person do it subjectively or perspectively? Or is it because Garang hailed from Bor? If you Dinka Bor separated with Nuer that is none of my business, I’m just telling the truth but nationally. Thanks

  15. Thiang Geka says:

    Kuot, separatists acquired arms and started fighting Arabs on 18 August 1955-1972 and again on 3th March 1975-1983. However, the very year Garang the first and the last unionst dictator of South Sudan went and told those separatists in Bilpham that the objective of separation (Separated- Sudan or Independent South Sudan) is not good and has to be replaced with unity (United-Sudan or New Sudan Vision).
    So, it was and when Garang started killing the separatists after they objected about what Garang said, Garang himself went to Ethiopia’s Leader but afterwards start killings in Bilpham. Have you now known separatists took up arms or fought not only Arabs (e g Sadik el Mahdi, etc) even S. Sudanese-unionists including Garang de mabior?
    You should answer the example of Ramciel and Juba because you said Garang was killing those of Joseph Oduho because he(Garang) wanted to liberate S. Sudan. The soldiers of Bor Dinka assisted by SPLA ‘hard-ware directed by Garang himself were killed by civilians (the white army). But, Malakal was captured instead. Read the history Kuot! Any revenge? White Army is more available why scapegoating? In the movement of Joseph Lagu there was no Arabs because its name was Southern Sudan Liberation Movement (SSLM/A), what about the movement of John Garang?
    Your answer alone to this question above can determines who fought for what. Thank God that the one who confused everything in Bilpham in 1983 or had been confusing the top leadership of specially the Torit Faction ended up somewhere there on Imotong mountains! And ever since the mountains took him (his life) the objective shifted to Juba.
    I know, failure is always resorted to insulting and violence, therefore whether my IQ is low, high or the Separatists were/are Nyagats (traitors), the only good news was that SS became independent. A very long way (Independence-SS) started in 1955-1972, 1975 and closed by John Garang (a project of Unified-Sudan) in 1983 but opened again in 1991 and ended by establishing the RSS in 2011. Come again Kuot!

  16. Thiang Geka says:

    Kuot! I shall next time answer you strongly, but before you could do that I wish you to read once more our civil war history, about the New Sudan Vision and its effects on the Unity of South Sudanese objective and Mr Kim Deng’s article as well as an article written just two days ago by Sarah Thomas. Thanks

  17. Kuot W Ngor says:

    I don’t know who is this Kuot who said, “Nyagat called Elhag Paul aka David de Chand.” I copied this from third response on the above article. So, if there is anything mind boggling in this article, if it is true that Dr. David de Chand colones himself to be Elhag Paul, if that is true, then he is not a leader at all as he claimed to be. I advised him to go back to us and find a confinement to hide for the rest of his life and die peaceful. That way, he will not smear his children’s reputation and his clan, the man is totally defeated in life. To the rest of you, this argument about Dinka, are demons talking in all of you, whether pro-Dinka or anti-Dinka. Without Dinka in South Sudan, South Sudan won’t exist! And so do other respective tribes, South Sudan belongs to all of us, and we need to find a way to co-exist. Hating one another will never take us nowhere and at the end with demon possession in you, South Sudan will turn into a massive grave and other people will take in the day light. If you really need peace and lasting country that will progress like the rest of the world, it is about working and by talking. Otherwise go and claim our border with Jalaba.

  18. Thiang Geka says:

    Kuot W Ngor, war is good to defend the country of ours, but there are those who do not like war in the borders e.g take Phanthou war of last year. These guys would want only to cheat people on history which is very clear.

  19. People, the massacre did occur over the Upper Nile Dinka land. Sub-tribes Dinka like: Abiliang Dinka, Dongjol Dinka, Luach Dinka, Ager Dinka, Atar Dinka, Paweny Dinka, Hol Dinka, Nyarweng Dinka, Ruweng Dinka, Nyarweng Dinka, Bor Dinka, etc. That is why it is being called as Upper Nile Dinka massacre.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.