Gamble On Peace, Mr President, Not On War With IGAD "... our real chance for salvation as a nation depends very much on brave and unselfish voluntary decisions by both President Kiir and Dr Riek Machar". 07 August 2015
By Jacob J. Akol (Editorial, Gurtong Focus Magazine, August 2015 Issue) *With more and more citizens falling victim on the battle field, in their villages; with millions threatened by famine and hundreds of thousands seeking protection at the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) in Protection camps and in the neighbouring countries; with unease between Dinka cattle herders in the Equatorian states and the dismal state of the economy, it would be advisable for President Kiir and his government to gamble on IGAD Plus “Compromise Peace Proposal” than to call their bluff on “disguised intervention”.* The conflict, which both President Kiir and Dr Riek Machar have repeatedly denounced as a “meaningless war”, is two years old this Christmas. As the conflict is spreading more and more, to states which have remained relatively peaceful throughout the conflict, is it not time the warring parties called it quits, or will they risk opening the country up to formal external intervention? While President Kiir, his government and supporters will still insist that it was “a coup attempt”, the man accused of the crime, former Vice President Riek Machar and his rebel supporters insist that it was an attempt by the president to get rid of him and the opposition; and that in the process Nuer tribesmen (of Riek Machar), women and children, became victims, intentionally or otherwise, of the Dinka (of Kiir) Presidential Guards; thus provoking revenge attacks on the Dinka by the Nuer in Jonglei, Upper Nile and Unity states. Although independent local and international observers will not entirely agree with Machar’s assertions, they are sceptical of the coup assertions by the president, pointing out that it did not fit into any known pattern of military coups on the continent. The government version was weakened further by the fact that the former detainees were accused and put on trial but were “pardoned” when it appeared that there was no concrete evidence against them in connection with “the coup attempt”. But much water has passed under the bridge since mid December 2013 and it is immaterial at this stage to argue on “coup” and or “no coup” assertions. The accepted reality now is that thousands of innocent Nuer and Dinka have perished in this “meaningless war” of revenge and counter revenge. Millions of citizens feel insecure, evidenced in the hundreds of thousands seeking asylum in UNMISS protection camps and as refugees in neighbouring countries. Millions are threatened by starvation this season and most likely in the coming year due to unfavourable rainfall and the absence of the youths who are on the war fronts. And while there is no shortage of rhetorical songs and slogans of “we want peace” from both sides of the conflict, there has been a shortage of truly brave decisions on the part of both President Salva Kiir Mayardit and Dr Riek Machar Teny. Ceasefire agreements have been broken at will, accompanied by blame and counter blame; punctuated with laments, which translate into brave words unaccompanied by brave actions. Here is President Kiir in a recent speech quoted elsewhere in this issue: “Towards the end of 2013, we once again found ourselves in another valley that was totally different from those we have experienced in the past. This time, we created our own valley through misunderstanding, poor performance, corruption, tribalism, hatred and aggressiveness. The mistakes of a few among us have affected each and every one of us and the impact has been felt in every corner of South Sudan”. Great statement; but what are we to make of “The mistakes of the few among us”? Who are the unnamed few? At worst, both President Kiir and Riek Machar will point their fingers at each other, never at themselves, as among the few bad eggs; at best they may admit that both of them are part of “the few”; yet they will shy away from making the ultimate sacrifice expected of caring and responsible leaders. The Compromise Peace agreement proposal put forward by IGAD Plus is not cast in stone. It is something to work on and it needs to be accepted in principle, negotiated over and modified within acceptable reason. For instance, the basis on which the calculations were made to give Riek Machar the percentages assigned to him and his group in the states and national power-sharing needs to be questioned, justified and adjusted accordingly. As for the army, the need to identify those who defected from the SPLA and reinstate them into their previous posts will be consistent with the reinstatement of politicians like Pagan Amum and Riek Machar into their previous party posts. Those recruited during the conflict, particularly the youth militias on both sides, are a different category and should therefor be treated differently to rehabilitate them into the society. As for the demilitarisation of Juba, it would have been encouraged by the population of Juba even if it were not proposed by IGAD. There is no need for an army in cities and towns. And we should not take for granted the support South Sudan has been getting from the region and further afield; hence we should heed the voices of frustration on their part with our intransigency in bringing a speedy peace to our people. Although the *Upper Nile Times* is not the *BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, Reuters * or* AP *to quote from*, *this particular quote from an Ethiopian diplomat, named “Beyene” has a ring of truth about it: Beyene “told the *Upper Nile Times* on Monday afternoon that regional leaders and Troika (US, UK and Norway) have run out of patience by the continuous intransigence of the two warring parties and that a final peace agreement must be ‘imposed from elsewhere even if it involves squandering the sovereignty of the Republic of South Sudan’. The diplomat disclosed that sponsors of the on-going peace talks such as Troika and other aid givers to the displaced South Sudanese civilians are overstretched and cannot see themselves helping South Sudan beyond 2015. The region and International community have concluded that this should be the only last chance for the warring leaders of South Sudan to strike a peace deal.” Take those comments seriously. We should not call their bluff. Doing so would be gambling on war rather than on peace with IGAD, supported in their quest for peace by the African Union (AU) and some powerful members of the United Nations. And we should not go about scare-mongering about “foreign troops” coming to take over our capital and the running of South Sudan, “an insult against our sovereignty and independence”. In reality, both “sovereignty” and “independence” are already challenged by realities. In case you have not noticed, we already have, at our own invitation, thousands of heavily armed foreign troops on our soil and in Juba from different nation-states of the United Nations, not to mention the Ugandan troops whom we invited to come in about two years ago. Millions of our people are dependent on external support for food, health and security. We should also listen to warnings from independent voices calling for peace, such as that of Catholic Arch Bishop Lukudu, quoted elsewhere in this issue: “We are seeing atrocities against human life and dignity on a scale which we have never seen before. The rule of law is disappearing. Our youth is being corrupted by revenge and violence. Our systems are being degraded as ethnic division is replacing our unity as South Sudanese”. Still, our real chance for salvation as a nation depends very much on brave and unselfish voluntary decisions by both President Kiir and Dr Riek Machar. As I have said often enough, both President Kiir and Dr Riek should sincerely apologize to the people of South Sudan for our failures under their leadership and declare publicly to VOLUNTARILY remove themselves from active politics after seeing us through an interim period of Government of National Unity. Their continued ambition to lead the nation after three years of GNU will detract them from the very urgent and important tasks of achieving peace, justice, reconciliation and the necessary reforms for a fresh start. Their continued ambition to lead after three years can only result in confrontation and making the GNU itself a failure before it starts. **Jacob J. Akol is Director & Chief Editor of Gurtong Media* Posted in: Opinions <http://www.gurtong.net/ECM/Editorial/tabid/124/ctl/CategoryView/mid/519/categoryId/24/Opinions.aspx> -- To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/southsudankob View this message at https://groups.google.com/d/msg/southsudankob/topic-id/message-id For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout --- 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/CAJb14op-oRVPVvyhm3LXf5Xi8f0sB0zhiBTFY5YkUjo-uf0_Hw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
