ElHag Paul’s Soliloquy and misguided posture to provoke ethnic strife: A rebuttal

BY: Manyok Chuol, OTTAWA, CANADA, FEB/11/2013, SSN;

ElHag Paul’s recent article, ‘Dr John Garang was an appointee of the Ethiopians to the SPLM,’ was apparently a retort to a response article I wrote and published on 12/JAN/2013 by South Sudan Nation website. His article, as we’ve seen, was also a response to others who in the past debated him before, apparently.

In responding to me and others, Mr. Paul brought to light new issues which were not in his initial article and could not have been subject of earlier response. For the benefit of my readers, I do not wish to be dragged into discussing these new issues and be, in effect, hopelessly distracted.

In a typical ElHag Paul’s article, his latest response to my response article did not disappoint our already very low expectations or has even come as a surprise. He peddled, again, unfounded and incendiary accusations against every Jieng: man, woman, and child— revealing much of the hypocrisy in a man whose writings aim to proclaim moral pedestal.

ElHag Paul’s article is misguided and by again responding to yet another article of his, many readers may hasten to suggest that I may be giving him yet another platform to write one more rancorous article on the subject. Such consternation may very well be true or in place but ElHag Paul actually exposes his unmitigated hate, and therefore himself, in his articles.

As in my previous article, I want to categorically restate that my response does not, in any way, aim to deflect criticism— legitimate or otherwise, away from the Government of South Sudan. Rather, I’m again forewarning against writing flagrantly irresponsible articles aimed at engendering and inflaming inter-tribal animosity in our country. We cannot afford to turn a blind eye when most of Mr. Paul’s writings are aspired at directly or indirectly perpetuate/arouse inter-ethnic violence, and especially knowing South Sudan as an ethnic tinderbox that it is.

In my first response, I focused and only addressed issues related to ElHag Paul’s anti-Dinka rhetoric, Dr. John Garang and the question of Founding Father of South Sudan tribute. This response, again, addresses, ad nauseam, issues of relevance in Mr. Paul’s latest response, his original article, and my earlier response thereto, even as I’m fully aware of Mr. Paul’ impervious idiosyncrasy or adamantine refusal to engage in rational discussions.

Legitimate government criticism versus inspiring ethnic strife

At first glance, one clearly sees ElHag Paul disgorging hate among the various ethnicities in South Sudan, particularly the rest against the Dinka people. Admittedly, there is very little substance in his latest article except, mostly, hateful bons mots aimed at cajoling and swooning his runners.

ElHag Paul seems a like an intelligent South Sudanese, confessedly, but he speciously uses his intelligence to infatuate his runners with anti-Dinka hatred. He remains accused as a bigot who unfortunately refuses to accept all as South Sudanese, notwithstanding all our ethnically rich diversities.

Even as Mr. Paul’s articles dangerously threaten peaceful coexistence among citizens, there is hope in South Sudanese infinite wisdom and capacity to distinguish between tribes, individual and government’s actions—or absence thereof, contrary to Mr. Paul’s perception of South Sudanese as primordial and a readily excitable lot! Mr. Paul likes us to think that his writings are good for South Sudan to survive as one united country. I would argue, to the contrary, that South Sudan will survive as one united country in spite of his writings.

In his reply to my article, ElHag Paul asserted the following: “Manyok Chuol’s article, ‘Dr Garang and the question of South Sudan Founding father: A reply to Elhag Paul,’ is a clear indication that the Jieng are unwilling to take responsibility for the ravages they’re inflicting on the country”. Mr. Paul seems to suggest that every South Sudanese is a victim of Jieng, therefore he is my victim! Is it possible that ElHag Paul and his runners do not see how ridiculous their imagined Jieng-engendered victimhood is? Such is the claim and extent of the absurdity of his anti-Dinka rhetoric. If the author valued credibility and thus be considered as convincing, could he not have aimed at more constructive dialogue?

Does ElHag Paul have a point, as this question must now be asked? He does, probably, if he considers the Dinka as individually inseparable from the Government of South Sudan and Salva Kiir as its head. But such warp reasoning is preposterous and could be antithetical to peaceful coexistence South Sudanese need to forge ahead as one united peaceful nation.

Mr. Paul’s argument goes like this, it seems: when a president comes from a certain tribe, such tribe should be threatened with the possibility to unleash violence against it should a president or his/her government proof as spectacularly failing, even as the tribe is not responsible for the president’s failings and isn’t violently keeping a president in office/power.

ElHag Paul should be reminded that the exercise of democracy comes with civilized realization that not all eligible citizens can be presidents of one country at any given presidential term, and still preserve peace and a country to govern; whatever the failures of the current president and his government, South Sudanese, meanwhile, need to wait for the next elections in 2015 to choose who will lead them.

I therefore appeal to ElHag Paul’s supporters whose foresight he may have corrupted to not farcically hold the Dinka collectively responsible for the Government of South Sudan’s failures, whether real or perceived.

It should also help all of us to keep in mind that there is no referendum on the Dinka as a tribe. The only referendum there is, is the one through the elections of 2015. That opportunity should allow South Sudanese to vote in or out their leaders, including President Kiir, should he decide to run again. I hope that President Kiir will choose love of the country over another groping presidency.

I’m sure other South Sudanese find it similarly difficult to understand why ElHag Paul, a man who toils to give others the impression that he is educated, does not comprehend that the Dinkas are politically and individually heterogeneous and that constructively engaging them as citizens, like the rest of South Sudanese are, is good for any peacefully conceived constitutional change in our country.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, let me also unequivocally and honestly say that, there are areas where I fully agree with ElHag Paul, although very limited. That “[t]here’re differences between institutions, individuals and tribes,” I agree and I said similarly in my article, which Mr. Paul was responding to. In addition, I continue to agree with Mr. Paul’s continued observation that “[i]nstitutions are formed of governing documents and management bodies such as constitutions and board of directors.

Anybody heading such an institution (chief executive) is expected to be guided by the constitution”. Unfortunately, that is where my agreement with him ends, relative to his understanding of governing and whom to hold accountable therefrom.

Subsequently, I reject Mr. Paul’s yardstick that “[s]o long as such a person upholds the constitution for the interest of all members he/she can’t be lumped up with his/her tribe or any other group of association because his/her actions would be fair and legitimate” because of its perversity. Asserting that a president’s tribe is a fair game when s/he doesn’t uphold the constitution is an odious rationale proffered for the convenience of the time.

This is because the converse of such statement is false and cannot stand. Indeed, when such a person, say, for example, a president, fails to ‘uphold the constitution for the interest of all members’, such a leader/president would be held responsible according to the laws of that country because as his actions would be deemed unfair and illegitimate. But to overlook that and hold his tribe responsible instead, as ElHag Paul is suggesting, would not only ensure a disastrous outcome but would reflect poorly on any claim of advancement/civilization in such society.

A constitutionally enlightened position, in place of ElHag Paul’s irrationality, seems to be that a president who so fails in the manner Mr. Paul has described should be impeached or voted out in subsequent elections, if he/she is still eligible to stand in such elections. That is contrary to primitively holding the entirety of a president’s tribe responsible. But Mr. Paul would rather have us dangerously tread this path.

As we can see, ElHag Paul’s reasoning presents a rather false dichotomy and for him to prod South Sudanese to choose either the existence of tribes or constitutional rule is bogus as the two can demonstrably and mutually exist.

I also take great exception to ElHag Paul’s rather trivial patronizing assertion that: “…the educated Jieng like Manyok Chuol, Ateny Wek Ateny, Joseph Deng Garang and Kuir e Garang — to be agents of change by educating their people…” This is as if the role he sees us only play, being Jieng, limits us and thus cannot perform other civic duties as South Sudanese!

It is absolutely hypocritical to criticize Salva Kiir’s alleged tribalism when one makes such outrageous statement, laced with tribally chauvinistic undertone! If Salva Kiir is a tribalist that ElHag Paul accuses as, what can we say about ElHag Paul who tends to solely assess President Kiir’s aptitude on the basis of his tribe?

Dr. John Garang and his earned Founding Father of South Sudan’s tribute

In my previous article referenced again above, I affirmed, like other fair-minded South Sudanese, that Dr. John Garang is our nation’s indestructible founding father. I knew as I argued that I was possibly rankling or causing agony in Mr. Paul with my presentation.

As ElHag Paul said and I fully agree: “Dr Garang was a formidable person of high intellect, no argument about it…. a suave political operator full of confidence. A speaker of rare breed” and “…Dr Garang’s work shouldn’t be vandalized by. [anybody… Dr Garang’s beliefs and achievement need to be highly valued within context”.

Unfortunately, Mr. Paul went on to infringe on his own advice/observation in what could easily have been a case of personal feat had he successfully managed to rise above his innumerably expressed petty self.

Thus, I wonder and now ask the question, between me and ElHag Paul, who is desperately trying to falsify the history of South Sudan with the sole aim to minimize Dr. Garang’s enormous contribution so that “…his community [does not] milk it…to put others down”. It’s ElHag Paul, easily. He falsifies history and say that what Dr Garang wanted was a “United New Sudan and he (Garang) went for it in spite of the odds against it. Anybody who respects and values Dr Garang won’t reduce his stature by not acknowledging his political belief and objective”.

As South Sudanese, we must be grateful that Dr. Garang led/guided our liberation aspirations with absolutely perspicacious brilliance. It’s totally absurd for anybody, who may stake a claim to a functioning brain, to suggest that Dr. Garang, as leader, was fighting for a united Sudan. The Sudan was already united and it was not possible to go to war only to unite it—see appendix (I) below for Dr. Garang’s pictorial illustration of Sudan’s possible solutions modalities to the country’s conflict, in form of Venn diagrams.

Dr. Garang was known for championing the rights of his people with great intelligence and political skills, not because of a nonsensical suggestion that he was trying to unite the Sudan, a country already then in unity. Accordingly, it’s mendacious for Mr. Paul to say that “Dr Garang’s unionist stance made him a renowned politician in the Sudan, the whole of Africa and beyond…”

Looking at Dr. Garang’s presentation of solutions modalities in form of Venn Diagrams in appendix I and understanding our own history, we conclude that John Garang and his colleagues were not fighting to unite the Sudan. They were instead challenging the basis of an already-united and unjust Sudan. Therefore, to say that he was fighting for his ‘unionist stance’ is to flaunt ignorance.

Dr. Garang fought to transform the Sudan in order to meet the conditions of any of the three (3) models shown in appendix I.
People like ElHag naturally and easily choose independence of South Sudan in model 3. What Mr. Paul and the similarly feeble-minded lot do not understand is the maze of what was the ‘Sudanese problem’. Ask Dr. Lam Akol and Dr. Riek Machar who thought the independence of South Sudan could be brought about if only they could publicly make pronouncements.

What were the organic guarantees of the so-called ‘peace from within’ and did it lead to South Sudan independence because they had publicly said so?

As leader, it was incumbent upon John Garang to define the parameters of the Sudanese conflict and articulate possible solutions. And he did so very well and signed the CPA that guaranteed the right of exercise of self-determination which culminated into South Sudan attaining independence. I acknowledge that much was done by patriotic South Sudanese before and during Dr. John Garang’s time but there is no questioning his towering contribution.

Easily, therefore, Dr Garang is the Father of the Nation and such patriots as Emelio Tafeng, Paul Ali Gbatala, Saturlino Ohure, Deng Nhial, Joseph Lagu, William Nyuon, Salva Kiir, Awet Akot, Kuol Manyang, Ngacigak Nyachiluk, Oyay Deng, Pieng Deng, Majak Agoot Atem, Hoth Mai, Mamur Meté, Kuanyin Bol, Samuel Gai Tut, Arok Thon Arok, Akuot Atem, Majier Gai, Dhol Achuil, Malong Awan, Dau Aturjong, Majok Aluong, Mathok Gengdit, Abur Nhial, Pa’gan Amum, Bior Ajang, Samuel Abujohn, Samson Kwaje, Kuol Amum— the list is very long but to just name the above does no justice to many ‘unknown’ fallen South Sudanese heroes, whether civilians, officers, NCOs, or chiefs; all of them are liberation heroes.

But again I am fully aware that I am presenting these facts to ElHag Paul, a south Sudanese history distorter, who is serially facts averse when Dinka people are involved.

As any reader can see, I have not tried to prove that Dr. John Garang wasn’t an appointee of the Ethiopians to the SPLM as Mr. Paul has tried to alter our history, for his convenience; to do otherwise would be to abuse the intelligence of South Sudanese who, like me, are living witnesses of our history and they know/understand it better than ElHag Paul who would rather credit Ethiopians with our history!

By: Manyok Chuol, Ottawa, Canada

19 Comments

  1. Kenyi Alex says:

    All is ok. I want Elhag Paul to know that some Dinkas hate the current regime more then him (Elhag).
    Manyok must of necessity accept that Elhag is right if he gives you the responsibility of educating the Dinkas wether you also have other responsibilities or not. Come back to Juba and you will prove Elhag Paul right in some of his assertions especially the behavious of Dinkas.

    • Wani George says:

      I know that no Dinka person will ever accept the fact that their fellow Dinkas are the cause of all these frustrations. One of them (Dinka) said they are chaotic naturally. I was watching a football match and suddenly, a young Dinka man got up and said I am a Dinka therefore f…k you all.
      He further said they have guns of different types waiting to see which Equatorians will talk especially the so called Bari. You Equatorians must understand this, he said. Now analyse this for yourself. God forbid.

  2. Manyok!
    What about Dr. Mansuor Khalid, Yasir Saed Arman, Yousef Kuwa, Malik Agar, Abdal Aziz Adam el Hilu and etc? Weren’t they participating with Dr Garang in liberating the Sudan People’s under the idea, “The New Sudan and Secular United Sudan”? This is because if what had been searching by Garang and the rest started only in 1983 under the above slogan became or turned to be the current Juba’ Government and not Khartoum’s. You could also mention them, I mean those names I have just jotted above.

  3. Tyson says:

    Dear Manyok,
    The chain of hysterics will not help. There is a point to pick from Mr. Elhag’s message.
    We need to co-exist. We need ourselves foremost as South Sudanese before paying allegiance to our inidividual tribes.
    The recipe for good existence is when we embrace love, tolerance and promote peace.
    Unfortunately, some Dinkas do not subscribe to these values. Let us take the opportunity to sensitize our people. All the fightings in Jonglei, Uppper Nile and Bahr el Ghazal are testimony to that, This a fact and MUST be corrected.

  4. Deng says:

    I am partially reading these articles as they are too long, too boring and too scary to read even if you like. This is a promotion of the tribal vilification since people like Manyok Chuol and Elhag Paul (I doubt the name Elhag Paul to be true) are making the vicious and defamatory statements against each other and each other’s tribe.
    This is very uneducated, can we choose to ignore the others who are stuck in tribal hatred and not write or starting writing on something else instead of tit for tat. This is a continuous psychological reprisal likely to be physical at some point as it continues. This kind of a warfare is no different from the real physical confrontation.
    We seem to have gone to schools to master such vicious language of hatred.
    The issue of Dr John Garang being a founder of the nation or not is crystal clear, we unanimously agreed to have his head on our legal tender, currency, money or weu, whatever you call it. This is a testimony but we should not forget the rest also because without the rest, Garang will have not miraculously liberated the country on his own.
    Again, as a Dinka myself, I will not defend this bitterly because others who are not even Dinka could acknowledge that. Can we do it Dr Machar’s style, some us are bogged down in 1991 SPLM internal discord and have been attacking our Vice President all their lives. What I have observed from our Vice President, he has chosen to ignore all these and devoted his time, energy and resources to make sure that south Sudanese did not suffer for nothing. – sorry for making it a long comment.

    • Dut says:

      Deng,
      Where did Manyok defame Elhag’s tribe and what is his tribe if you even admit not being sure if Elhag Paul is the guy’s real name? You are using the same tired and useless moral equivalency. You admit you don’t read unless it’s a terse statement, likely to be lacking substance. Elhag Paul is dangerous and you’re useless not to see that..

  5. Alierthiy. says:

    Congrats to you Manyok.
    This coward Paul, who disguised his identity had nothing to offer to South Sudan during liberation years; is being desperately disturbed by his own lack of contribution toward South Sudan independence.
    Elhag Paul is a coward and failure like Lam Akol and De-chan, who only saw weakness in a system but fail miserably to suggest workable corrections.
    A soldier like you who fought Arabs as a little boy of tender 15 or below has much to offer to our country unlike this coward named Paul. He must know that action speaks louder than bickering and crying.
    A time will come where guys like Paul would be asked to tell what and how much they contributed during liberation process. THOSE who were not participants during war years, who are now making a lot of noise against Dinka are nothing but hypocrites who deserve no hearing. Amen.

    • Kenyi Alex says:

      Alierthiy,
      Why are you so much socked into tribal and so called liberation pride and close your eye from seeing what may drag this nation into irreversible mess?
      Let us look ahead not behind, for what is needed to develop is not the same with what was needed for the liberation.
      For example, liberation needed arms while development needs policies.
      Have a nice Valentine.

    • Khamis Imoi says:

      Dut & Alierthiy,
      Again your sentiments towards a visual brother like Deng is blurred by the blind interest of defending your tribe “Dinka.” I would not love to comment on this but you seem to be nursing the useless notion, “where were you during the war.”
      Dut and Alierthiy, if am not mistaken you are amongst the few who co-incidentally found yourself out of your homeland not because of any feeling for patriotism but escaping from hunger and promises of better life in either Ethiopia or Equatoria, a philosophy late Garang used. I personally recalled how we were conscripted to go to Itang, accordingly it was because of better education. I like many honest others can still testify that we understood patriotism after reaching Ethiopia and fighting in the red army for years.

      So don’t pretend on vibrant issues related to the liberation of this country, you are amongst the bunch of innocent cowards who were taken to Kenyan or in the IDP camps in Equatoria and now claimed to be liberators. As my brother Deng puts: “lets not focus on tribal vilification” but rather tolerance, the wisdom to bring peaceful co-existence in South Sudan through people like El Haj Paul and the late Isaiah Abraham will not be compromised by mentally malnourished individuals like you.

      And note: where are the Turko-Egyptian rulers, British colonizers and the recent Arabs who tried to imposed themselves on us, have they not gone? If you think you will impose your dreams here, you will not live to see how your precious people will be dealt with.

  6. umoja says:

    Dear All,
    Whether you like or not, what Elhaj Paul is saying is the truth. It is being said TRUTH is always bitter. Who doesn’t know chaotic behavior of most of Dinkas, especially in Juba. Most of dinkas need change of mind set or else one day one time dinkas will face it.

    Look at the below fighting with Dinkas:–
    Jongeli fighting now
    Juba Commercial fighting
    Eastern Equatoria fighting
    Western Equatoria fighting
    Wau fighting

    So, don’t waste your time dinkas, time is for you to change. Don’t let change be forced on you.
    Umoja

  7. Eastern says:

    Alierthy,
    your inflammatory comments keep the South Sudanese communities apart! What do you mean by ‘those who contributed during the liberation struggle’? The foot soldiers that were physically at the frontlines, those working for international organisation outside the Sudan who footed the SPLA/M bills, the peasants providing food for the soldiers or what.
    You have in your mind that only those who participated in the liberation struggle are the soldiers in Koryom, Mormor, Jamus, etc. The gallant men who physically confronted the enemy in the battle front. You stubbornly continue to ignore and ask your like-minded individuals to ignore the roles played by the other groups I have alluded to earlier.

    Can’t you think properly? Have you ever asked yourself where Dr. Garang was getting all the money from? Garang was getting diplomatic and political support not just because of his efforts (I don’t dispute the fact that Garang was very savvy). His lieutenants, who were mostly diplomatic and learnt men and women helped, selling the image of the movement abroad. These people contributed money in cash, others, through their contacts in the ‘international community, sold the image of SPLM/A to get the much needed support and recognition.

    Remember, it was not the blazing guns alone that gave SPLM/A victory at the end. Get used to the fact that others ABLY PARTICIPATED in the struggle. Without any diplomatic support, trust me, the SPLA/M will still be struggling force in the bushes of South Sudan. Familiarize yourself with other liberation struggles that lacked diplomatic support.

    What Paul is always saying, most of which is true, is that the Dinka people need to change their attitudes towards others both within South Sudan and in the Diaspora. This not a hidden fact: people have come to know Dinkas as arrogant people. This is the experience both at home and abroad. Paul is asking that this kind of behaviour be changed. The country remains for all South Sudanese who struggled through means commensurate to their abilities or that were available at their disposal!

  8. Dan says:

    Dut,
    You said it all very well brother. When I read his (Deng) reaction to both Manyok and Paul especially when he claimed both are defaming their tribes when no one knows ElHag Paul’s tribe except ElHag himself. Deng is actually the undersecretary in the office of vice president. And for you mobs who do not see the difference between the Dinka as a tribe and their politicians keep doing it. It is a blessing for Kiir and others.

  9. Tyson says:

    Dear All,
    Many thanks for providing some basics into the way our reasoning has been eroded by deacdes of war. As fragmented South Sudanese or Dinkas alone, we cannot succeed on our own. We should be grateful all the time and recognize also the non-boastful and humble players who worked hard to give us food, medicines and even diplomatic pressure (during the war) in order to reach the CPA and eventually the Referundum.
    The ignorance we have now is how to CHANGE. How do we change from our narrow thinking to fight poverty, illiteracy, famine, corruption, tribalism, etc? We should call SIN with its proper name. If you are tribalist, corrupt or hungry, why do you pretend that you are clean?
    South Sudan will surely capitulate into failed state if we continue to bury our heads in the sand.
    When people steal money, we tend to protect them in the name of liberation and tribalism. Unfortunately, we failed to learn whether we possess bachelor degrees, masters or PhD. It is all rubbish because it does not translate into the changes we expect from a learned person or an intellectual.
    As learned South Sudanese, please remember to know what is correct and let us work together to develop this country. If my father is wrong and looting the wealth of our country, I should remind him that even Former Egyptian president, Mubarak did not take a single dollar to the prison. Don’t loot the properties of this country, because one time, the masses will remove you. You will be humilated.
    It is my prayer that this lenten season offers the opportunity for all out intellectuals, liberators, looters, tribalists, etc to reposition themselves before God to ask forgiveness for what they have done and promise God never to repeat again. In God’s family, there is no loser or victor! All are equal because they are all sinners. They should sincerely ask for pardon because the South Sudanese institutions where you be forgiven publicly are rotten. The justice chambers are soiled with blood and corrupt money. The cowardice weapons to threaten or kill those who point out the truth. EVIL will never triumph over JUSTICE.
    Let us all pray for God’s help in this lenten season so that the precious blood or our savior will cleanse us.
    Amen!

  10. Alierthiy. says:

    Guys, my comment above didn’t glorify Dinka as the sole liberator. Though the Dinkas played their fair share for liberation of South Sudan, I’m not here to blow horns. My comment was meant to provoke the real coward the so called Elhag Paul. Nowhere had I suggested that all other tribes were not participants for our country liberation. What I hate is that people Like ELhag Paul who were in bed with Arabs are the one going up and down cooking up trial animosities. For god’s sake, how could a learned guy villify the whole community that is large as Dinka. This is where I know Elhag Paul was not a liberator but a collaborator who was wishing doom to South Sudanese. Just because his wish didn’t come true; Mr. Paul, just like Khartoum regime, continue to wish doom to South Sudanese. His writings are meant to sow seeds of discord among tribes of South Sudan. This is why he continues to refuse to render credit where it belong. All partriots South Sudanese know very well that Dr. Garang skills which enable him to win and the only populous tribe the Dinka.

    • Kenyi Alex says:

      Alierthy,
      time for accusing internal criticism as enemies is long gone. Style up. SPLA/M used to silence internal critics as enemies and ended up killing many. So Elhag is not a Khartoum-er but, patriotic South Sudanese.
      Better your Family almost disappeared but other families are actually nowhere to be seen. So brother, Let us look ahead instead of reminding ourselves with the negative past.

  11. Alierthiy. says:

    Bring us where we’re today. We must therefore, give Dr. Garang and the Dinka huge credit. Trashing Garang and the Dinka as a tribe is a joke. Without whom we would have been narrating if not experiencing horrific scene from Arabs now. Even Joseph Lagu-dit conceded that Garang succeeded just because his Dinka people joined the SPLM/A in numbers. So today if South Sudan government is being corrupted by few Dinka elites, tell Elhag Paul to target his writing against those elites, thugs. period. Otherwise, people like me whose families almost shutdown by liberation war will pop up when the whole tribe is target unnecessarily.

  12. Kuot says:

    Kenyi Alex,
    if development needs policies then how does Dinka get the blame for lack of policies? the most effective gov’t policies originate from the parliament which is headed by a non-dinka called Wani Igga. Most effective economic policies are initiated by the Ministry of Finance and National Planning which is headed by a non-dinka called Kosti Manibe. military policies are initiated by the ministry of defense which is headed by a non-dinka called John Koang. Let us not unfairly blame the whole tribe for a dysfunctional system that is shared by all the tribes of South Sudan.

    Bol Thon, unless you were not the SPLM/A but it was that Dr. John Garang has consistently declared that SPLM/A is fighting for a united Secular Sudan. However, the vision of secular New Sudan did not robbed South Sudanese of the right of self-determination or freedom. In fact John Garang said it numerous times in his speechs that any South Sudanese who wants to fight to liberate South Sudan is free to fight until he reaches the border of South and North Sudan. Dr. John Garang’s energy and effort were spent in the liberation of South Sudan. This is a fact that cannot be denied. If you don’t know that Dr. John Garang was liberating South Sudan, then you were not in South Sudan.

    The Northerners you mentioned in your comment were convinced to join the movement to contribute in defeating the common enemy (Khartoum regime) that has been an obstacle to the freedom of African descendants in the Sudan. Dr. John Garang ideology of New Sudan helped the SPLM/A after Riek deserted the war with almost all the Nuer in 1990s. Having Yusuf Kuwa, Malik and their soldiers within the SPLM/A made the absence of Nuer to be nothing in our minds when we were confronting Sudan Armed Forces in the battlefield. So the idea of New Sudan or secular Sudan helped to bring Northerners on the SPLM/A side when they were supposed to fight South Sudanese as Northerners on the side of Khartoum regime. This is what Dr. John Garang did during the war time to deny Sudan government a chance of mobilizing the populous North against the SPLM/A. Dr. John Garang also won CPA which gave birth to referendum and Independence of South Sudan. That is why he is the father of this nation, whether you like it or not.

  13. Kenyi Alex says:

    Kuot,
    Let me agree with you on, “Let us not unfairly blame the whole tribe for a dysfunctional system that is shared by all the tribes of South Sudan,” and disagree on, “if development needs policies then how does Dinka get the blame for lack of policies? the most effective gov’t policies originate from the parliament which is headed by a non-dinka called Wani Igga. Most effective economic policies are initiated by the Ministry of Finance and National Planning which is headed by a non-dinka called Kosti Manibe. military policies are initiated by the ministry of defense which is headed by a non-dinka called John Koang”

    Those people you mentioned are surely non-Dinkas but, can you briefly prop deep in water? Brother, you need change may be you do not know what you are inflicting on others. Since you make the majority, your behavior spread all over the Country spoiling the Image of this Country world wide.

  14. Joseph says:

    Alierthiy & Dut,
    Why is it difficult for you to understand other people? Why is it becoming a chorus for Dinkas to sing of liberating others? By the way, if you really claiming that you are the only people who liberated south Sudan, what makes your liberation concentrated in Equatoria land is because you wanted logistic support. Were you dinkas eating your own food from Equatoria Land? Were you not accommodated as IDPs in Equatoria land? did you not get educated in Equatoria Land. This so-called hegemony of dinka will come to an end one day. Please read books of history and you will know that most of the rebellions are started by the minority and they always emerged as the winners.

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.