Disenchantment and bickering in party politics brings ruin to South Sudan

   - Article <http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article49896#tabs-1>
   - Comments (1) <http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article49896#tabs-2>

[image: 
email]Email<http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?iframe&page=enviar_email_articulo&id_article=49896>
[image: 
print]Print<http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?iframe&page=imprimable&id_article=49896>
[image: 
pdf]Save<http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?page=spipdf&spipdf=spipdf_article&id_article=49896&nom_fichier=article_49896>
[image: separation]
[image: increase] <http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article49896#>
[image: decrease] <http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article49896#>
[image: separation]
[image: separation]
------------------------------

By Arop Madur Arop-Gotnyiel

February 10, 2014 - In my new book, the Genesis of Political Consciousness
in the South Sudan, it states that, as the Republic of South Sudan joined
the league of independent nations, it is too early to celebrate, because
its survivability as a nation state, in which all its citizens can be proud
of, depend very largely on a number of factors. One of these factors, to
discuss in exposition is that South Sudanese politicians to comprehend
first the mechanics of real-politick, and then begin to organise themselves
politically. The second factor we shall discussed and which South Sudan
Politicians should seriously take note of is to find a rallying point, in
their practice of politics. This will enable them to pull their people
together, in order to forge a common South Sudanese nationalism instead of
tribalism.

Discussing the two factors together, it is safe to state that, now that our
country has obtained its political independence from the North Sudan, which
was the objective in their continued political struggle, it will be
instructive and advisable for South Sudanese political leaders, to adopt a
new focal point where many of our nationalities can embrace one-
nationalism, instead of tribalism. During the Anya Nya liberation struggle
(1955 - 1972), for instance, the rallying point which brought the South
Sudanese together was their fear of the Arab domination. It was that factor
which made all South Sudanese joined the Anya Nya war for the total
liberation of their country from the Arab Islamic North Sudan's domination,
from sixties ending in the seventies. That unifying factor enabled South
Sudanese staged a successful collective and concerted struggle whose
objective was, first to liberate their country from the Arab domination in
order to have a country of their own and second to organise themselves
politically. In the second war of liberation, led by the Sudan People
Liberation Movement and Liberation Army (SPLM/SPLA), in 1983-2005), the
unifying factor was slightly different in the sense that, while some South
Sudanese joined the liberation struggle because they were attracted to the
principle of creating a united secular Sudan that would accommodate all its
diversities, others joined it, apparently, in order to have a country of
their own country, as was envisaged by the leaders of the Anya Nya Movement.

Now that the old enemy has gone and the South Sudan has become an
independent state (first objective), the leaders of the ruling Sudan People
Liberation Movement Party (SPLM), and other South Sudanese political
parties waiting on the wings to come to power, must look for a rallying
point that will bring or keep their people together so that they embrace
one South Sudanese nationalism, rather than anything thing else that would
tear them apart as they start fighting one another as they argue; who of
the tribal leaders to follow.

The rallying point which I have in mind and which I believe can bring about
national cohesiveness and unity among our diverse nationalities is a fair
and equitable distribution of the public cake by the government of the day.
Arguably, equitable distribution of national and human resources and good
governance should be the theme that each and every political leaders should
base their party programme of action, aimed at effort to bring about
national unity and sustainable economic development.

Having realised their first objective, the independence of their country,
which was the dominant theme throughout their continued collective
struggle, and now that they have a country of their own, the next move that
politicians must address themselves immediately, is the organisation of
political parties(second objective), in accordance to the Transitional
Constitution, and the political parties elections regulations which
stipulates that; for a party to be recognised as a political entity, it
must have acquired about 500 card holders from the ten states of South
Sudan (maximum eligibility); or, at least 500 party card holders from the
six states (minimum eligibility) of the Republic. The political parties
should, therefore, not waste precious time but to hurry up and obtain party
card holders in readiness for the registration of their parties. The second
move the political leaders must address immediately, is that, each of the
political parties, is expected to come up with a defined political ideology
and a programme of action. Having spelt out the political ideologies of
their parties, and are recognize as political parties, they will then
register their parties and thereafter hold their respective national
conventions. It would be then that they could contest in any general
elections which could bring them back to power, in the case of the SPLM, or
pose as an alternative to the incumbent ruling party, in case of the other
parties vying for power. It is indeed very advisable for those who would
like to form effective political partied to recruit electable members into
their parties. There is no point to recruit persons who may have been
attracted by one's political standing in the society or through material
inducement who are not electable. This explains why many political parties
in any country in the wide world do not come to power despite the fact that
they have long been in existence for decades as well established parties.

One classical example is the 1986, Sudan second democratic experience. Once
the May Regime which had been in power for nearly two decades was
overthrown by a combined popular uprising and military, in 1985, Sudanese
of all political persuasions, began, in earnest and formed numerous
political parties, now that democracy has been restored. What followed was
that by 1986, when democratic general elections were about to be held,
forty political parties had sprung up and were ready to take part in the
upcoming general elections scheduled for April of that year. Unfortunately
when the results of the 1986 elections were announced in June, there were
ten parties, out of a total of forty parties that contested; won elections-
four national parties in the North and six regional parties in the Southern
Region.

Coming to the political parties which appeared to have developed party
ideologies, arguably, it is only the Sudan People Liberation Movement
(SPLM), which was founded and launched as a socialist oriented movement as
embodied its manifesto (1983) and may have apparently remained so,
politically speaking. Up to the time of writing, SPLM has remained the only
dominant and well established political party. Its' leadership is expected
to have transformed its ideology during the last three decades of it
existence and as soon as it became a political party during the interim
period (20o5 -2010 and beyond), SPLM is expected to have maintained its
membership and appeared to have also rallied their supporters together in
anticipation for the registration of their party and the holding of the
long awaited national convention (2011-2013). This would have signalled
that, members of SPLM have after all, understood, the modern mechanics of
real-politick and as the only party that already political has ideology.
Unfortunately, what one hears, is political disenchantment and bickering
which appeared to have ripped the giant party apart. Equally important to
note, at this juncture, is that the SPLM have seemingly large membership
which is composed of; first the historic leaders of the party who have
remained faithful, throughout the life span of their party: the second
group is the returnees and the third, the new arrivals, having recently
joined the party. In such a state of affairs, any party contest for
leadership, supporters of each of these groups, are expected to look at the
candidate of choice in that perspective. In such a situation political
disenchantment and final split becomes inevitable. This of course, demands
that, the lead members must educate their supporters; to acquired party
discipline and commitment to the party, code of conduct of the members of
the party and the Party ideology and programme of action.

As regard to the other existing political parties, in the political arena
the Republic of South one can say that there are only two parties that are
organised, having ideologies and programmes of actions: these are the SPLM
DC and the South Sudan Communist Party. But their parties have maintained
relative membership due to circumstances beyond their control. With
stability in the country, these two parties may acquire large following
that would make them pose, in the long run, as forces to reckon with by the
giant SPLM but only if it remain a dominant party with large following;
having been in the political field for a long time. Observers of the three
parties the SPLM; the SPLM DC and the South Sudan Communist party can
predict that, any one the three parties may merge since they appear to have
similar agenda, all being on the left of centre ideological speaking. That
merger may only happen in the long run with a modified agenda merging as
Social Democratic Party. Arguably, the SPLM and the SPLM DC may also merge
in any foreseeable future; the two having maintained the same ideology and
programmes of action since the SPLM was launched in 1983. However in any
event of any political contest SPLM is expected to maintain its popularity
though with reduced majority.

Generally speaking, I would like to look critically at the basis on which
political parties are formed. It is important to stress this because any
political party is supposed to have been composed by like minded groups of
people who are persuaded by one of the world known socio economic and
political systems: left, centre left, the centre, and the centre right. The
smaller existing political ideologies which came as a protest in what they
claimed as the SPLM exclusive policies. The leaders of these protest
parties can benefit if only if any of them adopt one of the world known
political ideologies enumerated above. Basically, activities of any
political party are directed toward one goal, the winning in any general
elections that can bring it to power or pose as alternative to the
incumbent ruling party. Furthermore, unity of any political party is very
crucial in order to avoid some inherent bad practices that had been
experienced by many independent African countries which eventually brought
ruins on them and their country through political wrangling and schism. The
beauty of democracy is that: when the leaders of a political organisation,
in a given country, which have fought and brought independence to the
country; their party subsequently becoming the ruling party: begin to lose
track and vision of what his party has fought for and become disorganised,
having lost the modern socio economic system it had embraced, it will be
natural for supporters of that political organisation, to leave the party
and join one of the other political parties in the country in effort to
find new rallying point that can satisfy their political leaning, and which
they believe, can bring peace, tranquility and sustainable socio-economic
development to that country.

Essentially, important point to stress in conjunction of what has be3en
stated above, is that, two years after our country has successfully
established all administrative structures and the development schemes
having started and not necessary flourishing, the politicians, the new and
the old, must sit down and spell out the political ideology of respective
parties they have launched or about to be launched. It is also necessary to
emphasise that supporters of any political party, expects the lead members
of their party to try to keep out of the public glare, their ideological
differences, skilfully sharing and nursing them, lest they could be
considered by the party's supporters to have failed their own party.

Having established the government institutions as discussed earlier and the
country starts developing, it will be then that those who will like to use
the party to come to power will be standing on strong safe ground. The lead
members of any party will definitely wield support from the party grass
roots, a move that will allow the party leadership to confidently stand
better chances to pose as a vote winner among the competing parties for
ascent to power. Naturally, needless to remind political leadership in the
youngest nation (Republic of South Sudan), that being members of a party is
assumed and considered by the party card holders as like minded comrades
having been brought together by the party ideology and programmes of
action. But once some of the party supporters do see that there is
political bickering in the party or that party is deviating from its
original principles in which the party was founded and launched beginning
to lose cohesiveness and comradeship, many of its electable cadres can
drift away and join any one of other competing parties whose political
agenda may appear attractive to meet their own political aspirations.

The question that all the political parties must answer, in this regard, is
whether any of the existing political parties in the country, do have known
political agenda: socialist leaning, conservative oriented or liberal/Mix
economy inclined. Admittedly, there are three known basic world socio
economic systems: capitalist, socialist or mix economy. It would therefore
be advisable that the existing political parties and the ones on the wings
should resolve disagreement about the ideology that the party can adopt. It
would indeed be very important for them to resolve ideology question before
they consider themselves as committed members of their political parties.
Equally important to mention is that the potential leaders of any political
party, must, in short, define the party ideology before thinking to enter
contest in any general elections. Any party that would seek to win majority
of the votes in any democratic political contest, must have electable
members in the party and a well defined programme of action which they hope
will attract voters that can bring it to power. This will enable those
oppose to that ideology, to define their own. Once this happens, it will
give voters a wide range of choice, in any future contest for power in any
general elections, to choose which of parties that meets their own
political persuasions and which they hope will bring sustainable
socio-economic development to their country.

As a matter of fact, it is advisable for all political leaders in our young
republic, to avoid political disenchantment, which often had plagued many
political parties worldwide, before and after the independence. There
should be a need to attempt to resolve their political differences, if
there is; in marathon meetings and reconcile all the diverging views and
then hold extra ordinary conferences to adopt the party programmes (if that
was the bone of contention) after which the party can be registered as a
political party. Up to the time of writing this article, it is a known fact
that, all the political parties in South Sudan, after independence, are
illegal as they were organised in accordance to the old laws of the old
Sudan. They must therefore register their parties in accordance to the new
Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan and avoid the
culture of unnecessary political bickering as this had previously plagued
many political parties.

In brief, political disenchantment and wrangling, in any party, is not
healthy at all because it can bring ruins to the country as a whole. This
can be explained by the current political disenchantment in the SPLM that
has resulted in horrific, senseless destruction to their country and untold
sufferings and hardships to their people. This can best be demonstrated
further by the subsequent narrative from the experiences of two African
nations; Ghana and Nigeria what happened to their countries as soon as they
became independent from Britain in 1957 and 1960 respectively. Please bear
with me.

The first example was that of the Republic of Ghana the first African Sub
Saharan country to obtain its political power from Britain in 1957. The
years that followed Ghana independence were charecterised by political
disenchantment and wrangling which led to the overthrow of Dr Kwame
Nkrumah, first President of Ghana in 1967 by General Joseph Ankara (1967),
who allegedly accused Dr Nkrumah for mismanaging the affairs of the
country. Few years past and General Ankara was himself overthrown by
General Afiffa who accused him on the same ground; mismanag the affairs of
the Country. Few years on, General Affifa was subsequently overthrown by
General Achaengpong, who was too overthrown in the country's bloodiest
military coup that brought Flight Lieutenant Jerry Rawlings to power. It
was after discovering that political disenchantment and wrangling would
take Ghana nowhere but inevitable ruins to the country; that Jerry Rawlings
conceded power to an elected President of the Republic of Ghana.

The second example to refer to, is the experience of Nigeria. In 1960,
Nigeria became an independent Republic. It started well as a democratic
republic under its first elected President Azikwe. Few years after
independence, President Azikwe's Government was overthrown in a bloody coup
by General Johnson Ironzi, who was also overthrown by General Yacobu Gown.
General Gown government; after successfully defeating the Biafran attempt
to secede from the Republic of Nigeria. The Republic of Nigeria, was
subsequently taken over by a military Junta led by General Murtala Mohamed;
who was subsequently overthrown by General Obessanjo. After having bought
some stability to the country, General Obassanjo handed over power
peacefully to an elected President led by Sheikh Shagari. Sheikh Shagari
Government was soon overthrown by General Ibrahim Babangida who was also
overthrown by General Muhammed Buchari. General Bukhari was subsequently
ousted by General San Abache who was also overthrown by General Abdel Salam
Abaker. Believing that military rule had had bitter set back to the country
economy and bad international image abroad and apparently believing that
continuation of military rule had retarded economic progress of his country
and could further destroy the country and its economy, General Abdel Salam
Abubaker, finally handed over power to an elected President, YarArdwa,
thereby bringing to an end decades of political wrangling. These are just
few instances that are recipes and warnings to my countrymen and women by
stressing that political disenchantment and wrangling will not bring peace
but disaster to a young nation like ours. As a reminder to ourselves, the
ongoing disenchantment and wrangling in the South Sudan ruling political
party, the SPLM, can confirm beyond doubt the disenchantment and bickering
has brought ruins to the young Republic of South Sudan barely three years
old. All our political parties must therefore declare that never again
shall political party disenchantemntwrangling plague our Country and
democratic transfer of Power should now be the slogan by all political
parties who would like to come to power in our country.

Finally, and for the benefit of the readers of this exposition and as I
started with a quotation from my recent book, The Genesis of Political
Consciousness in South Sudan (2012), which I believe, none of my
compatriots including, some who are now involved in the ongoing fratricidal
destructive war in our country, haven't read it, apparently, because of the
poor culture of reading in our country. I will therefore conclude my
discussion with another quotation from the same book------ --last paragraph
(page 299) which reads:--But as we conclude the Book, vital questions
remained un answered and which will indeed continue to ring in the mind of
readers of this important narrative-----the last question is What does the
future hold for this young republic of South Sudan as it begins to organise
itself into a nation state? Will it be torn apart by ill thought ambition,
greed and selfishness? Or will it flourish as to become a nation state that
all its citizens can be proud? ---Stand unshod, the place is holy! It is
the dearest prize for the fallen millions of the loved ones: they lay down
their dear lives for its birth and survival ends quote.

*Arop Madur Arop-Gotnyiel is a former journalist and can be reached at;
[email protected] <[email protected]>.*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14op6i-Gc%3D6oL_76f%3DfPeZ2wGfvk0Qc6Q-UVS9JXg_6QtAg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to