South Sudan conflict was inevitable- no ingredients for nationhood?


South Sudan bleeds, and the nation’s leaders must now staunch the wound.

Why am I not surprised that South Sudan is imploding just two years after becoming an independent state? Perhaps it is because, deep down inside, we all expected something like this to happen.

We knew it was only a matter of time before the war between the largely Islamic and predominantly Arabic north and the south would morph into a post-independence power struggle for the soul of the new nation.

Before South Sudan attained its independence, the sole focus of its people had been to break away from Khartoum. Dr John Garang’s Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) became a unifying platform, representing the collective aspirations of an otherwise disparate population with little else to hold them together.

The so-called Comprehensive Peace Agreement between the SPLM and the government of Sudan, which was signed in 2005, was seen by many as the beginning of a new journey of peaceful co-existence, hope and prosperity for the people of South Sudan.

Many observers around the world believed, or at least wanted to believe, that all the ills of South Sudan were due to the oppressive rule of the Khartoum regime, and once independent, those troubles would disappear.

But there were sceptics whose view of South Sudan has always been that it would not, and perhaps could never, become a “nation”. In their view, South Sudan does not possess any physical, social or religious ingredients for nationhood.


Regardless of these divergent views, the people of South Sudan were single-minded in their quest. They wanted their own country.

The CPA did not grant the Southerners this wish, but it did provide a timetable by which they would conduct a referendum to decide whether or not to break away and form an independent nation. That referendum took place in January 2011. An overwhelming 98 per cent of the people voted in favour of independence.

But as the dust settled on the celebrations marking the creation of the new state, and as the world’s cameras moved on to other stories, a new reality began to dawn on the people of South Sudan; that having their own country is only a first step in a long, arduous journey toward the bigger and more elusive goal of nationhood.

As Kenyans discovered during the post-election violence of 2008, a country can unravel in a day due to unresolved socio-economic and political issues.

Unresolved issues do not go away; they wait for an opportune moment to surface – sometimes with a destructive force of violence that, if not contained, can cripple a country for life.

Given the fragility of the new government of South Sudan, the question was never really if, but when, the eruption would happen. At some point in its history, the people of South Sudan were going to have to come to terms with the demands of nationhood. What has surprised many is the speed with which that critical moment has come.

So, how prepared are the country’s leaders to deal with the onerous task that lies before them? What will it take to build a nation out of a population that is so divided and so deeply wounded?

How do you begin to forge trust and a sense of oneness among a people who have been scattered across the globe because of war, and who have been hardened by decades of unrelenting suffering? How do you craft in the minds and hearts of the people an appreciation of values like democracy, justice and equality?

The answers to these difficult questions can be summarised in one word: leadership. The volatile place in which South Sudan finds itself demands extraordinary leadership; one with both the insight and humility to understand and seize the moment to rise above personal and factional interests for the good of the nation.

The world is rooting for South Sudan to make it safely across this first major test in its journey as a nation.

President Salva Kiir and former Vice-President Riek Machar have no alternative but to lay down their arms and begin to cultivate in the new nation a culture of dialogue and consensus as a way of resolving disputes. History will judge them harshly if they bungle this critical moment.

Mr. Ondeng is the director of East Africa Leadership Institute and a strategy consultant for Kenya’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. (


  1. Coldit says:

    Thanks sir for the input. However, the culture of dialogue you said is what is know in a mature leadership in other places but a leadership by proxy from Kampla like what is Juba has no prahases like “culture of dialogue”. Therefore, the staged coupe by president and his team to themselves, has South Sudanese know, is a tool to silence ss voice of democracy and strengthening tyranny type of leadership.

    In the process innocent people have paid dearly with their live e.g. Nuer massacre on 16-20/12/2013 in Juba was done by the president’s republic guard that he collected from his hometown three month ago and trained by Uganda just for the purpose of staging coupe and make it a civil war by massacring Nuer who will revenge it on Dinka Bor then a civil will keep the president in chair. And the Nuer will be fighting the Ugandan president’s bulled East Africa countries.

    Is it just ss that is lacking leadership? M7 would have been question about the installation he made in ss and who authorised Uganda to interfere in other sovereign state’s internal affairs if the East African leaders are serious about its people? the East African leaders should condemned Juba Nuer massacre by republic guard rather than threatening those who react to that with military action.

    The ss know the Nuer very well, the Nuer love to stay in peace with those who want to but they also revenge the bad you did to them. It is possible that we East African will fight the Nuer and other South Sudanese to protect Dinka tyrant type of leadersip that has crippled and looted ss resources for years.

  2. Elijah Samuel says:

    Mr. Odeng,
    Indeed the problem of South Sudan is lack of leadership. More importantly is also is the problem of the Dinka wanting to Dinkanized the entire South Sudan. They throw around the slogan ” We are born to rule”. ” We liberate you from the Arabs” Thus claiming being the liberator gives them the right to take any land of other tribes by force and settle in mass numbers all over South Sudan in the pretense having liberated the lands. Without the Dinkas respecting the ancestral land of other tribes and forgetting about their ambitions to be the top dogs all the times instead of mutual existence and opportunities, there is no hope for South Sudan.
    This time around, the crime was strted by kiir himself. I thought the following article spells out clearly what went wrong.

    • john says:

      I think We are all a peace lovers and want to co-exist within our country it doesn’t whether you are Murle, Nuer, Dinka and etc just to name the fews. The fact is the matter is not that simple under Kiir to exist and to seek a leader at his present. I believe that thoughts he can silenced all of us. No, he will fail and will answer some tought questions from International Criminal Court about the kill of innocent Nuer in Juba and that goes for anyone whom might have committed anywhere in South Sudan. Another, that I want to say to the people Malakal in Uppril Nile State rebel against Johnson and his forces. This freedom warrirors are fighting in Bor and Bentiu to stop Kirr’s gangs from killing more people. Do not sit and wait for government armies to come and kill you or rape some women within your area. While you are considering that, know this it not Dinka and Nuer. It is much more deeper than that, it is about angles vs deviles to to free our people from dictatorial regime. My appeal to you people of Uppril Nile to joint hands with us answer the from freedom fighters who to unite all of us. It is your call to do the right thing for those who lost their lives without any fault of their own just because are from certain tribe. Thanks you brothers and sisters. God bless the freedom fighters.

  3. Mohd Adam says:

    Wow, Mr. Ondeng, you have said it all, but you have missed to mention the same disease that almost plunged Kenya apart in the stolen elections of 2007, which was clearly won by Hon. Raila Amolo Odinga, but the cancer of African continent called, TRIBALISM, denied Raila, his democratic and constitutional rights to rule Kenya. Until yesterday. = Jubilee Ford saga.
    Well, Kenya stands far better off than South Sudan, where tribes here even don’t know themselves. It is not possible to put together animals of different species and call it a family. The case of South Sudan being portrayed as Nuer Dinka issue is nonsense indeed. These two tribes do not even constitute half of the rest of the tribes in South Sudan, both are the minority. The only reason that they always surface in issues in the country is the higher rate of illiteracy among them. They are not better off than other tribes in South Sudan. The second thing that weighs down on them is also the fact that they are not God fearing people, they practice animism. Killing each other is the only way for settling scores with their adversaries or those they perceive enemies.

  4. Jacob Adut Mabor says:

    Thanks Mr. Ondeng……I see a precisely sincere analysis in your article……the problem is lack of genuine leadership……..and “lack of ingredients for nationhood”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Simon Luk says:

      Mr. Ondeng, you are a sincere brother and a good man. I hope level headed South Sudanese, who are able to think reason beyond their ethnic boundaries would reflect and act upon your your objective analysis and witty writing.

      Most importantly, the underneath (quote) or portion of your analysis caught my attention.

      “Unresolved issues do not go away; they wait for an opportune moment to surface – sometimes with a destructive force of violence that, if not contained, can cripple a country for life.”

      In Zimbabwe, ZANU PF headed by a veteran politician, Robert Magabi sat on serious National problems for long and they finally exploded.

      In Kenya, KANU (dead) headed by another veteran politician, Daniel A. Moi did similar mistake and the country plunged into shameful crisis under Kibaki Vs Odinga.

      In South Africa, ANC headed by a world-class leader in the person of late Nelson Mandela tried to act smart, but the dark cloud still hang over South Africa and it is a matter of time before it explodes.

      In my poor South Sudan, the SPLM, a historical moment and well respected political party didn’t have a gut to contain or manage National problems and the Can of warms opened on Dec. 15th.

      The young rising leaders across Africa should learn from the above blunders and put the continent of Africa in the right path.

  5. Beek says:

    Machar should face Justice,he has to apologize and go behind Bars because he has abused systems and forget about his CAREER.

    • Diktor Agarab says:

      Spoken like a Dinka tribalist! Who started the war? Wasn’t it Kiir’s fabricated coup allegations against Dr. Machar? What did the allegations against Dr. Machar have to do with his tribe? Why did the Dinka Presidental Guards decided to target Nuers for indiscriminate liquidation if they only wanted to apprehend Dr. Machar? There are a lot of whys? But as a Dinka extremist, you don’t get it.

    • john says:

      Beek you should know better than that, Machar was depending himself aganist kirr and his forces when he unleashed them to kill after The meet Kiir mentions the 1991 and response the sing song by a lady in Dinka language that may mean warriors song. Those were sign that show that Kiir was planning a war aganisnt his adversary within the political party. People of Sudan have a dictator in the palace. He will go to Huge and spend the rest of his in jail. We are sick and tired of him running with his duty cowboy’s hate. He is wanted by ICC for killing and still having Uganda finish them of for him.

  6. Lagu says:

    Mr Ondeng,

    You have gone a long way to put this ideas together for people to read, as an effort to help people make sense of the situation of South Sudan. But in fact, you have said pretty much the same thing we have been hearing all along. But there are some points that you have raised here which may be hard to justify. I respond to you as a South Sudanese who grew up in the country, lived in it during the difficult time of the war from 1983 to 2005, but also have had the opportunities to live in other places, both in Africa and in the West.

    Let me say the following:-
    1. South Sudan came out from a war that was resolved through peace agreement between the warring parties. Now it is a known fact that 0ver 52% of peace achieved in this way unravelled within the first 5 years and war resumes. The reasons are many and I am not going to discuss them. But for now, the examples around us are in fact very shocking. Uganda in 1986 had a peace agreement in Nairobi which unravelled in just less than two weeks and that brought Museveni to Power until today. Rwanda after the peace agreement in Arusha unravelled in less than some few hours. Angola went the say way in just a year. Only Mozambique held on. So the situation of South Sudan is not unique.
    2. The cheapest explanation of the war that raged from 1983- 2005 was that it was a North-South war. Claims are made that Southerners rose up because Moslems were oppressing Christians. This was not only partial but totally false explanation that floated around propagated mainly by international agencies. From day one in 1983, the SPLA was a liberation struggle for the whole Sudan. And during the Declaration of Principle in Machakoos in 2002, the unity of the country was put as the priority. The protocol for South Sudanese to exercise their right for self determination, was to correct a historical injustice of lumping all people in one Sudan without proper processes and procedure and secondly because this idea got accepted by SPLM/A in 1994 as plan B. Naturally the referendum could have easily resulted in the unity of the country, had Khartoum been flexible on issues concerning national identity and accepted to remove the Islamic Sharia as the legal basis of the national constitution. The phrase encapsulating this was for Khartoum to ‘Make Unity Attractive’. Unity was not made attractive and in fact the opposite took place between 2005-2011. So South Sudanese were left with only one option to assert their dignity as equal in this world with the rest of humankind. That was to go separate. Now are South Sudanese regretting that they voted for separation. Not at all. Today they die but as a free people and not like what they used to be.

    3. That South Sudanese do not have ‘physical, social and religious ingredients for nationhood’, is completely absurd. Both physically and socially, South Sudanese are very distinct and it is known almost everywhere. The sense of togetherness is very strong among South Sudanese. They are light hearted, honest and highly spirited people and very resilient. Everywhere South Sudanese are known to like coming together and celebrate or spend their money on social events. South Sudanese in the cities of the neighbouring countries and across the world are known for big families; generosity and kindness; response to those who needs help even at the cost of their own lives. For example back in the days of the war when many South Sudanese used to live in Nairobi. There is this area called Zimmerman where many have taken residences. Thieves used to fear the place. The reason being that if a neighbour raised an alarm for help, South Sudanese will be there in numbers and deal with the intruders immediately without being called for. But with other communities, one can be robbed and killed and no body helps you. Even as this conflict runs, South Sudanese meet outside of South Sudan and share their lives regardless of ethnic identity. If by physical is the author implied physical infrastructures like roads, and the other infrastructures, it is difficult to explain how these make a nation. What is currently on the ground is poor but from 2005 to date, the changes that happened are comparatively significant.

    4. The most important trait is that South Sudanese are known for speaking out their minds and defending their rights without any fear even at the cost of death. The people of South Sudan hate oppression, no matter who does it. That is why even with spears, clubs and arrows, they started the struggle against the forces of Khartoum and persisted till what they wanted was achieved. This gives a very illustrious example to all the people in the region on how to rise up and challenge dictators. If South Sudan regain its peace and irons out the current differences, many more people who now in the region are suffering oppression will see them as champion of freedom. That was already indicative when during the celebration of South Sudan, even people from Tuareng society came to see how South Sudan overcame the odds. Many more people in other parts of the world would want to go the way of South Sudan but they have to answer the question of the cost.

    5. For more objective people, they will know that what is happening now is the result of the inadequate Comprehensive Peace Agreement that was also poorly implemented. One of the glaring areas of failure in the CPA was the poorly implemented security arrangement. First the reintegration of the forces and then the disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration into the community was not properly done. In fact no civilian disarmament was done. The armed forces continued to function on the basis of personal loyalty. Independent monitoring of the CPA and the mechanism of holding defaulters or violators to account was not put in place. Even the method used to arrive at the CPA was faulty. It was more exclusive than was expected. The people, especially the civil society organisations who have the moral authority on the ground were excluded and so were the other armed factions who were already on the ground. On that account, it was to the credit of the present government that saw it important to invite and negotiate with the other armed groups in South Sudan as an attempt to correct some of the weaknesses in the CPA. Lastly the corruption that has crept into the system. In global context, corruption puts high premium on the position of leadership, especially in places where the regulatory mechanisms are not strong. This causes social breakdown through endemic conflict since corrupt leaders reward the loyalties of their supporters using public resources. This is a very sinister factor affecting not only South Sudan but the entire region.

    6. At least considering that there has been consistent call from world leaders for negotiation between the conflicting parties, what is happening on the ground has its roots in political struggle between opposing individuals who command large supports. If it is an atavistic conflict which is brushed off as tribalism, how can a method such as is now being applied be recommended to end the problem. But with South Sudan, tribalism has been bought into as the most effective framework to analyse and understand the problems in the country. Having lived in East Africa, and in the light of the recent history, I do not see South Sudan as different from the other Eastern African Countries or those in the Great Lakes Regions of Africa. On the foreground of the problem of the region is poor leadership that uses the tribe as the instrument to monopolise and control society by accessing state power. The difference in South Sudan is that the instrument of war, especially automatic weapons are available and accessible. It is not the low literacy rate that is important in this conflict scenario of the region. There is no evidence in history that people who are illiterate are prone to war. In the last century the worst wars that killed millions and affected the whole world originated in very educated nations.

    To my compatriots South Sudanese, it is important to recognise that our country has gone lower than what most of us expected. The people are dying and this is very bad. Across the world tribalism appears to be the only way of living in South Sudan. Tribalism is being used by our leaders to further their goals. In the light of the destruction we are witnessing and the humiliation we get from it, it should be all the more reason to assert the values that define our people. The values of love of freedom, openness and generosity is common to all South Sudanese communities. Our culture is a welcoming one, regardless of the ethnic group we come from. We have a great deal in common that can build a powerful nation. The wonderful sense of sacrifice we have is second to none in the world. Now let us rise to the occasion.

    • Diktor Agarab says:

      Lagu, before you start spouting nonsense go liberate Nimule!!!

      • GatCharwearbol says:

        Dear Diktor Agarab,

        Thank you for point the truth to Lagu. My Equatorians brothers were beating drum of war before this fiasco started, but they are now backing down. This is time for them to liberate Nimule from Dinka. The war is open and anyone is allow to liberate his or her place from the oppressors. It puzzles me why my Equatorians brothers and sisters are nowhere to be found at this critical moment when it should be the opportunity for them to liberate their land from Dinka.

        Thank you again, Lagu should first think of liberating Nimule and then move on from there.

  7. Joana Adams says:

    Dear Mr. Pete Ondeng,
    I couldn’t agree with you more. As we all know, African countries are products of Western colonial creation. Boundaries were drawn for commercial interests which had no thoughts about the compositions and viabilities of these entities and how they will fare in generations or centuries to come.
    However, we cannot always blame the colonialists. They have brought us bad things but they have also brought us good things such as education, technology and have linked a hitherto isolated continent to the rest of the world.
    I do agree with you that the main problem of Africa is that of good leadership. Whereas, we have embraced all the good benefits of the post WW2 modern world such as membership to the International Community through its various UN organs, we have fallen far short of embracing the values that are integral to membership of the World of Nations. Most African leaders continue to behave as though they are tribal chiefs and not presidents or prime ministers of nation states constituted by various nationalities. Unfortunately these new found glories are exacerbated by the unrestrained use of state powers which are supposed to be regulated by other national organs such as the legislature and independent judiciary.

    When you have a government headed by members of an ethnic majority, the tendencies have been to control all state powers and resources for the benefit of the leader’s tribe to the detriment of the rest in the country. These leaders who in most cases come from rugs to riches over night where there are national resources such as oil, diamonds, gold etc. seize on the opportunity to enrich themselves and their kins men and women to the exclusion of others. Before long they become intolerant to criticism and become paranoid about people wanting to depose them. Instead of humbly taking stock and correcting any errors in how they are misgoverning the nation, they turn on their perceived enemies with vengeance through intimidation, lynching and other forms of terrorism.
    The per-occupation with pacifying their political opponents naturally diverts their focus from the real issues of building a viable and inclusive nation state out of a collection of distinct nations. Nation building requires having the right vision which must be backed up by correct government policies and programmes. In the case of South Sudan the leadership of the SPLM/A first and foremost sought to enrich themselves and their families and today these political elites are one of the riches class of leaders in Africa.
    Secondly because they have discovered that power is so sweet and comes with privileges which puts you above other ordinary men and women, they want to retain it by all means even if it means underming democratic means. In the case of South Sudan where there is a so-called ethnic majority and now increasingly a second largest ethnic majority, the rules of democracy are altered to suit the need of the majority. The so-called majority start harbouring the illusion of being born-to-rule even when the reality shows miserable leadership failure. So indeed given the history of post independence African nations and given the short history of South Sudan (1947-2013), the explosion of ethnic conflict in this new nation was entirely predictable. Even the leaders had no illusion about it. What they thought they would do was to crush any opposition in the bud. They have failed to learn from history and they have failed to learn from all the accumulated wisdom on good governance. Now South Sudan doesn’t have to just deal with the impact of long liberation struggle; the daunting challenges of nation building and national development but also the effects of deep national wounds that will be the legacy of this genocidal ethnic conflict which has now engulfed the new nation.

    Joana Adams

  8. Bentiu today says:

    that is your evil wish but will not happen, tribal motive prevents you from telling the truth.

  9. kikisik says:

    Thank you very much for your excellent analysis, you are truely a friend, and a brother to the people of South Sudan. This is the generations that we are hoping to lead Africa into prosperityone day- not the old useless politicain like the Uganda President who instate of being a mediator to the crisis start taking side by fuelling the situation. These are not a kind of leaders Africa must trust to solve African problem, but their time is soon coming to an end.
    “Leadrs comes leaders goes, but South Sudan or Africa will remain forever”

    • john says:

      Very interesting response kikisik on our brother’ compiling arguement. Let me let m7 of Uganda started by training 4000 presidential guards from Gokrial without any knowledge from the current Spla Chief of Staff and they were deployed to protect the president Kiir from his rivals and carried out order from the president eliminated any opponent who may be trying to challenge the president’s judgement. They were order by to arrest Riek and other senior officials from opposition group. Now, for them to complete the mission they were to dissarmy Nuer presidential guard considering that is a heave weigh in Spla and that some soliders might be still royal to him as they tried to that fight news out and Riek escope into a busy and make his to Where he may be now. To come to the point m7 responded with a gunshif aganist the rebels in Jonglei State. So, We know that South Sudan may attacts others players that their aims have nothing to do with peace or the economic of the country. It was just take and or help them kill themselves so that We can get a ticket in the game. Like, Uganda its troops are not to help to finish the people of South Sudan.

  10. Lokilachong says:

    Mr. Peter Ondeng,
    Your analysis of the situation in south Sudan coated with insult of the country. South Sudan as a fledging nation has indeed insurmountable problems that required both genuine and intellectual leaders. President Salva Kiir is not leader and Dr. Machar can not be a panacea in anyway. But the nation was on a right track of development because south Sudan unlike other African countries that attained independence in the 1950s and 60s was more prepared them all. The struggle to free south sudan from the north began even before Sudan attained its independence in 1956. Intellectually, morally, physically, and resourceful south Sudan was prepared to be autonomous and independent nation.

    I disagree with you and many of the skeptics whose views you presented. You noted that “there were sceptics whose view of South Sudan has always been that it would not, and perhaps could never, become a “nation”. In their view, South Sudan does not possess any physical, social or religious ingredients for nationhood.”

    The issue with south Sudan is tribal. South Sudan has 52 tribes and the largest are Dinka and Nuer. Historically, these two tribes had been at war with each other for generations, and mainly because of power, dominance and cattle rustling in the region. Even when the war of liberation began, all were suspicious of one another and that reached its climax during the split 1990s splits that led to Dr. Garang and Dr. Riak factions. Even after the comprehensive peace accord of 2005, both parties remained jealously suspicious of each other. The same as notorious Kikuyu and the other tribes of Kenya.

    As an African, you should know that it is difficult to solve tribal issues. South Sudan can be a good country if the tribal conflicts are halted especially between the Dinka and the Nuer. Allow me to say this, just like the Kikuyu, Dinka are notorious because they want to extend their dominance to all south Sudan. They want to remain in power forever, they use intimidation, and they want to occupy land of other tribes especially in Equatoria by force. Such behavior is unacceptable everywhere, it is bad behavior and the course of tention in south Sudan.
    Today the war is between the Nuer and the Dinka, tomorrow it will be between the Zande, Bari, Shillukc etc; and it may be difficult to find a permanent solution. Apart from this tribal conflict, south Sudan could be a bread basket for eastern Africa and the middle East. Dr.Raik Machar might be a shield that tries to prevent the Dinka claws from causing more harm to other tribes. From reliable sources, we have learned that there was no coup, it was fabricated just to humiliate opposition and a means to grip on to power by the President. Sorry, do not insult our country but insult the incompetency of our leaders.

    Oyet Lokilachong
    PhD student, Waldan University.

  11. Bentiu today says:

    thanks Oyet Lokilachong,
    for all truth you made to him, Kenya is most corrupted country and tribal politic is the one that bringing the Kikuyu to power in every election in Kenya.
    for him to insult our country is unacceptable, we are in good country with all natural resource only that we don,t have capable leader that direct the country we have been lead by illiterate president for more then Nine( 9) year and this is what victimizing south Sudan for slides backward, when we get a leader who have universal knowledge we shall overtake Kenya in term of development since having a lot of resource with less population.

  12. Diktor Agarab says:

    Oyet, I can still see that you’re far from being a PhD material because your analysis is lacking and bespeak of a fundamental lack of analytical skills.

    What Peter raised here has been observed for some time. In essence, our common hatred of the Arabs was the only thing that united us. With the Arabs gone, there is nothing that binds us. The Kiir regime missed the opportunity to unify the country mainly because he was a tribal thief who thought the country was his chiefdom.

  13. lokilachong says:

    Diktor Agarab,
    I see that you have nothing substantial to say except insults because what Odeng said is a direct insult to us all south Sudanese. I am sure you have a distant memory, so easy to forget what happened in Kenya in the last five years or so. Kenya is more advanced than south Sudan but then why did President Kibaki and Uhuru Kenyatta all Kikuyu, stole victory from Raila Amolo Odinga, not only once but twice? It is not because of tribalism, corruption and nepotism? To call Kiir a thief is also not proper, because the problem of south Sudan is lack of genuine leadership and democratic education that tribalism seems to override. What we need in south Sudan is a visionary leader such as Dr.John Garang where Salva Kiir and and Dr. Riach Macha are no comparison. A fledging nation like ours lacks many things including a right direction. I am sure those hurdles will make us grow strong as a nation and a true leader will emerge some days. But if you think that Arabs were the only cause of unity in south Sudan why don’t you join Omar Beshir in the North and see how that unity works.

  14. ssim says:

    Thank you Mr Ondeng for acknowledging the fact that our problem with the arabs in the north has gone. And every south sudanese is proud for the freedom they achieved after more than 50years of struggle. But our problem in South Sudan is how to keep this freedom practical and be embraced as one of our social values. The regime in Juba is busy doing whatever it takes to sabotage this great value. Kiir can not employ the same ingredients which fuel war in the old Sudan in South Sudan. Kiir who is greedy and wants to hold onto power like Museveni for 100 years and refuses to confirm the country to democratic values is the problem of South Sudan. Riak in his intelligence and love to the people of south sudan kept on correcting Kiir. He keeps on heralding that democracy is the only path for our prosperity in South Sudan.
    It is true that more than 85% of south sudanese are illitrate. But this is not an excuse for Kiir to be a dictator akien to Mogabi, Kigame or Museveni regimes in their respective countries. Riak wants to lay down a democratic infrastructure in South Sudan starting from the pary he dearly loved, the SPLM. But Kiir refused and used his melitia to kill the spirit of justice, liberty, freedom and the rule of law.
    So we have the intelligence and the resouces necessary to instill at least a value which will unit our social fabric and consequently build South Sudan to nationhood.

    The problem is Kiir and his dictatorial lying governement.

    So, this problem of South Sudan must be ousted so that this nation is set on the right track – democracy and the rule of law.
    Riak started liberating south sudanese from John Garang’s dream of New Sudan. He fought for self determination for south sudanese. The next objective is to liberate South Sudan from the rule of a dictator and establish a democracy in the country.

    South Sudanese people MUST rally behind the revolutionist, Riak Machar, to oust this tyranny if we need a genuine unity.

    Keep it up Riak and south sudanese who love freedom, justice, equality and a rule of law are in your support.
    Diktor agrab is right to tell Lagu to fight them in Nimule first. Because Equatorians who used to complain about this regime has got the opportunity now to wake up and join freedom fighters in Bor, Uper Nile, Western Uper Nile (Bentiue).
    Unless you join hands together with Riak to flash out this tyranny a real peace and unity will not suffice.
    Long live our freedom fighters
    Long live democracy in the SPLM.
    Long live democracy in South Sudan, the beloved country
    Long live South Sudan
    God bless South Sudan

  15. Api says:

    hahahahah!! brothers and sisters,
    violence does not bring democracy to assure, it just brings mistrust and greed. Nevertheless in 1960s Martin Luther king rally the blacks behind him and peacefully march on the street in order for them to gain freedom and rights like any other citizen in USA or does it mean that they can’t make up an army to fight for their right? Let’s preach peace but not fueling violence it can not benefit us either.

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.