Should South Sudanese Vote for Unity or Separation?

BY: Nhial Korow Wicleek, CANADA

FEB 1/2010, SSN; Following my previous article that titled “The viability of the two Sudans,” I have broadly explained the suffering that southern Sudanese have gone through under cruel rule of northern regime, the Khartoum government.  It is tangible fact however, that southern Sudanese were treated with no respect.  Our identity, values, and cultures were denied for the sake of political proliferation and forcibly used informal system of extermination of southern Sudanese.  

Imposition of Arab values, cultures, and language is what the Arabs want for the rest of the marginalized communities. It is, however, that it should baselessly be a shameful thing when time dictates the choice people can make.  Imperatively, nobody is susceptible for misrepresentation.  However, genuineness does not favor overlooking, devaluing, underestimation, and a whole lot more.  It is in fact, a delusion in the mind of that person thinking so.  As it has been a prevailing attitude to the Arab Sudanese, the results would never favor oneness for the sake of claiming back our tarnished identity, culture, and our beloved freedom.

As people with rich culture, rich land with rich resources, and strong race, we would never embrace a sense of intimidation.  We are not popped of Arabs north of the country as some would wish.  Our being under Arabs’ rule has shown us insignificant irregularities, which could not be accepted.  Meaning togetherness for all these years with Arabs has been causing us our lives and our land.  If that is the case, it should be noted that we should rise and stand for our right in the remaining few months to come for referendum. 

In this, we need to open our eyes and remain vigilant.  One may think peaceful divorce should be achieved; this is not true even when Mr. Bashir genuinely out stated that his government would be the first to accept Southern Sudan independence during the fifth Anniversary of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement held in Yambio.  It is irrational and would unlikely happen. 

To further extent, a peaceful and just divorce of the current Sudan under the influence of the two partners--the SPLM and the NCP--would be a tenacious event.  What will make it tenacious are the interests guided by the principles of separation and a uniting dream for the country.  Both the south and the north hold some varying interests to which, none of the desired characters would be given up for the sake of another, unity/separation.  To the south, self-determination is the ultimate decision to enjoy the golden bowl without the north as one can see with the current southern Sudanese spirits.  However, for the north, to allow this such an event, it would be a political disaster. 

As pointed out earlier by Dr. Lam Akol that south Sudan independent would be an “endorsement of Somalization.”  It is in fact true that one can present his/her arguments depending on his/her feeling.  If Dr. Akol thinks separation would drastically result into political suicide, and that it should not be endorsed is to his own understanding.  But for how long would we be under Northern regime that does not and would never allow political transformation? For how long would we be governed by the Arabs? What was the reason for liberation struggle if our target is to opt for unity of the country?

I think these questions need clear explanation at the grassroots level, for these people need to have clues in order for them to understand these issues.     For now, even if I question kind of democratic system the GoSS practice, would be a disturbance to my little mind.  The political philosophy in relation to the moral understanding of a true democratic practice is farther buried in vain.  Thus, nobody should question this point for we lack this political tool and live far behind our target.  It is in fact a waste of our preserved energy if we keep striving all day long.  Not just to pause our fight for good governance, but to lower our reasoning and why democracy that has been claimed is not readily achieved by the very people who claim for it. 

I would rather stand firm in support to separation despite the ugly face of the GoSS leadership.  It is good that we should have our own government and iron out any single misconduct that bear nationwide malpractice and lack of integrity.  Our leadership is still young and still deserve to be criticized with caution.  I know that one would not like to see its ugliness, had it not been this short lived peace, we ought to still run back and forth without a token like the one we daily criticize.  Yes! President Kiir administration deserves to do more to bring satisfaction that is not seen for about four years.  Yes Dr. Machar the Vice President deserves to offer his full support to his leader for it is the same administration so that we can reach the goal of our dream. 

But that does not tell that there aren’t significant issues to be criticized.  There are dozen of them.  Such things are not limited to political difference in the circle of the Politico-Bureau; rather, the others that lack appropriateness are included and should be regarded with less appreciation if the leadership does not change them.  Our goal is to govern ourselves and manage our rich resources and suppress the political ambition of the Arab world that favor Sudanization and indirectly support the Islamization in Sudan that is inhabited by the multicultural people.

In fact we are different people that would never become the same.  If we were the same people, development could have been carried out throughout the Sudan and cover its various locations with equality and similarity.  But that is not the case, and if we intend to opt for the same style of neglect we have seen before, should we blame and finger point Arabs for our own mistake? I doubt it!

I like the theory of rationalism and the story attached to it, and would like to use it in this regard to convey little message.  As it is attached to finding ways of arguing truthfully, the highly intellectual figure of the Catholic Church centuries ago held inconclusive debate that aimed for finding how many teeth a horse would have.  Continuously, they spent lots of hours and could not come closer to concluding their long held debate, until a young gentlemen comes and help them out.  His resolution was to open horse’s mouth and count its teeth than to waste time debating.  After hearing this, they all rose up and cast the gentlemen to the ground and revoked him, saying he is demon possessed.

This story could be related to our long held political transformation we have been proclaiming.  To flip a coin by saying a nationwide system that favor Sharia law should be dissolved and transform it to democratically elected government where freedom of expression, press, and right of individual be given and acknowledged throughout the whole country be considered non-violently.  What happen? It took us 50^th years to get closer to this dream. 

Sequentially, we were revoked and cast to the ground.  Torture is the best word to use to describe this situation.  Political scandal and a cheat-sheet system were in it recurring practice.  Vandalism, bribery, and nepotism should not be left unmentioned.  Racial segregation and lack of acknowledgement to equality were in their quantities.  It was so directive.

Of course, to change the political system and transform it to a better system where all races and religions could be acknowledged with full remark is to pursue the idea of democracy.  But the unlikely situation that devolved this long sought dream would still avert for worst than for better because the governmental system is run by the same individuals who killed the idea of achieving the goal of unity.

Moreover, all Sudanese are not Arabs and are not Muslims, and are not color people in order for them to abide by the laws that do not favor pluralistic society.  If doubt it, let take a look at 1955/6 census results where black Africans living inside Sudan constitutes 60% of the total population whereas the Arabs constitute 40% in the sense of cultural rather than racial identity.  This statistical figure was faked and remains biased because the research was carried out by the Arabs.

They further divide Africans population into 30% in the south living in the savannah grass land and 30% to the west, central, and Blue Nile (the Ingassena).  This comprised northerners of non-Arab descendants such as the Nubians, Beja, Zaghawa, Fur, Masalit, and others living far west to the Darfur region.  Figure signifies less population to indicate that African Sudanese are visible minority and could not obtain fair political representation in all government organs. 

Whoever questioned this baseless and biased figure would undergo torture or even death sentence.  Lack of recognition and multifaceted irregularities would be imposed on such person.  The current death sentences of the Darfurian Sudanese represent the similarity of the past condition if one can look to it. 

Because Arab-dominated regime in Khartoum does not refrain from victimizing their foes, they continue imposing this hash condition against others.  I hope no one can say it is imperative to live in peace with such people and never claim for a divorce. 

Time come and goes and nothing seemed to really change for the same mentally of the Arab Sudanese against black African Sudanese is the one still persisting.  When the oil was discovered sometimes in the 1970s, the situation continued to be really hash and so more torture and a calamity of the situation was experienced.  Non-northerners were subjected to unnecessary conditions such as insults, blackmailing, lack of social recognition, denial of their right, and immortal acts were imposed on them.  The reasons was very implicit given the fact that it should be carried out silently in a tactical form to terrorize black Africans and abandon areas closer to oil wells so that they remain less knowledgeable to what going on. 

Even when the war took its sharp turn, the Arab never give up on such dreams.  Thanks to SPLM/A for bringing these insignificants behavior of Jellaba to international level by legitimizing the liberation struggle. 

As far as it is concerned, the same condition applies during this interim period.  The CPA has become nothing but a symbolized agreement to deceive the international community, monitoring the world that we have an agreement signed to cease the unnecessary.  The agreed protocols, border demarcations, political transparency, and lack of wealth sharing have become the--on and off--political crack joking between the two partners.  I hope one can realize why a peaceful divorce would unlikely come about. 

To further this topic, some commentators comment on what a viable state such as south Sudan country would look like; some also comment on lack of good governance and incompetency of the GoSS.  These topics are nothing but frightening issues to scare away the southern Sudanese and not to take decision for an independence state.  It is the work of Arab people to make up such baseless arguments so that they win back southern Sudanese population not to vote for secession and leave the fate of secession to separatists. 

If attractiveness of the peace agreement was not seen as stipulated in the CPA, who should consider voting for unity during the referendum because southern Sudanese would not govern themselves? I doubt this argument for lack of convincible reasons.  Also, nothing would change the delaying tactics of the NCP for not making peace agreement attractive if people vote for unity.  As I stated earlier, southern Sudanese have all those necessary might to be able to run their affairs despite lack of good governance with the GoSS now.  We always know incompetency comes and goes; therefore, southern Sudanese would not deprive themselves for opting with the unity choice because of this incompetency.  It will also cease too and so a just and transparent system would replace the old one.

As an example, so many countries gained their independents were through this stigmatization from their colonial rulers that they would not manage their affairs.  It didn’t happen likewise, and all of a certain, they have gained their independent states and managed their affairs normally up to date. 

To me, it is in no way that these commentators should keep brainwashing the south Sudan masses about baseless arguments.  Their comments are unfounded and unrealistic for the success of southern Sudan and its own people.  We better should manage our affairs than to take the unnecessary choice of unity for the sake of freedom.  It would be better that southern Sudanese humiliated themselves than to be humiliated by the Arabs they have known for years.  IF IT DOESN’T WORK, BARREL WORKS. 

Nhial K. Wicleek lives in Canada.  He can be reached at korow1st@yahoo.ca

COMMENTS, PLEASE CLICK HERE

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