BY: Chol Deng Yol
Political manipulation is amplifying in South Sudan to the extent that the informed folks have become uninformed; truth have become untruths, deceptions and deceits proceed honesty, allegation turns newscast and news chances claims. There is just too much confusion; the public is disordered with unsubstantiated information here and there.
Two weeks ago, politicians organized peaceful demonstrations in all states of South Sudan to protest against foreign forces intervention following IGAD’s communiques on South Sudan. One week later, the same politicians, after the AU Summit in Addis Ababa, accepted deployment of what they called “Protection” force to South Sudan, defeating the purpose of the earlier organized peaceful demonstrations in the country.
The very innocent general public including school children who were organized into peaceful demonstrators, even though, rejecting deployment of foreign troops were puzzled by the government shifting position to unconditional acceptance of the foreign troops.
To some informed citizens, the government shifting position was translated as a ploy to score some diplomatic scores regionally.
The uninformed majority duped as “peaceful demonstrators” were made to understand that UN was set to take over the Country’s affairs. To the poor uneducated and unconscious South Sudanese, there existed little knowledge on the difference between the so-called UN Trusteeship/stewardship and regional protection forces.
Erroneous analysis of the root causes of our problems will always make fools of us, the South Sudanese.
Transiently, we are in current crises because of power struggling among the SPLM elites. These elites, because of their thirst for power, have fragmented the legendary SPLM party into IO, IG, DC, and SPLM Equatoria etc.
To the politicians, the knowledge gaps among the general population have turned into golden opportunity to misinform the uninformed citizens to rebel against the international community, particularly the UN, instead of against the very politicians who have mishandled the affairs of the sovereign state, South Sudan.
From time to time, our South Sudanese politicians lie to the public that the UN and the international community should be blamed for the ongoing political crises because they both have interests to proclaim the sovereignty and leadership of the government.
But the question begs; to whom is the principle of sovereignty attested to? Do we have sovereign state or sovereign individuals in South Sudan?
In modern societies, individual persons do not have sovereignty unless they are absolute rulers like the Pharaoh, but this is the case yet again in South Sudan.
Our politicians act as if they are above the sovereignty of this beloved country forgetting that they are under the sovereignty of another entity called South Sudan. Naturally, we, the South Sudanese are impatient with high temperatures but these high dispositions will always put our beloved country at risk.
Cognizant of our people temperament and the government’s way of handling political and diplomatic issues, the recent adoption of the UNSC resolution 2304 (2016) on the deployment of 4000 regional protection forces to South Sudan was a clear assessment to the South Sudanese diplomatic maturity; the world has resorted to our neighbors, with their fickle interests, to fix our house, a move that will likely be rejected by the government.
For the government of South Sudan to maintain her face globally, acquiescence to the deployment of the regional forces remains the only viable option otherwise the current regime will be isolated diplomatically.
What the government should do now is to work-out the “exit” strategy for the regional protection forces; negotiate the size, mandate, weapons and contributing countries.
Direct confrontations with IGAD, African Union (AU) as well as the UN Country member states will not only scare away investors, including big financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank, but also will motivate possibility of placing South Sudan under some form of international supervision.
Threats of arms embargo and sanctions may be avoided only if our government avoids further falling-out with the United Nations country member states as well as the UN Security Council.
I would conclusively advise our government to approach diplomatic matters with sober thoughts because in the middle of difficulty lies any opportunity, otherwise accepting regional forces is far much better than the UN Trusteeship.