Power, burgeoning parasitic capitalism & ethnic nationalism: South
Sudan Self-destruction
Apr. 07 Featured 16 comments
From: Peter Adwok Nyaba , South Sudan, APR/08/2017, SSN;
Introductory remarks:
The legendary riddle of ‘chicken and egg’ corroborates the current
realities of South Sudan civil war, whose effects have rendered
irrelevant its causes and triggers, but at the same time have left the
culprits, the victims and the mediators bewildered.
The absence of policy tools to address the crisis (writes Dr. Peter
Adwok Nyaba) left the region and the international community with only
two options: confine Dr. Riek Machar to South Africa, and give
President Salva Kiir six months to clear the SPLM/A (IO). The
consequences now register as dire humanitarian situation, refugees and
famine.
A few days ago, Mr. Festus Mogae, Chairman of Joint Monitoring and
Evaluation Commission (JMEC) paid a visit to Dr. Riek Machar
Teny-Dhurgon, the SPLM/A (IO) leader holed up in South Africa since
November 2016. The purpose of the visit was to ask Dr. Riek to
renounce violence, declare unilateral ceasefire and come back to Juba
to join the national dialogue (ND) President Salva Kiir decreed last
December. It was like adding insult to injury.
Mr. Mogae’s mission proves the very truth that the cause of the war is
trying to catch up with its effects in view of the message he
delivered. Mr. Mogae’s mandate is to monitor and to evaluate the
implementation of the agreement on resolution of crisis in South Sudan
(ARCISS).
Since July 2016, Mr. Mogae has been telling the world the opposite of
what actually was happening in South Sudan. Intimidated by Information
minister, Makuei et al, Mr. Mogae is reduced to a messenger; ferrying
messages from President Salva Kiir Mayardit and the Jieng Council of
Elders (JCE) to Dr. Riek Machar.
This new assignment undoubtedly puts Mr. Mogae in an embarrassing
situation of admitting that ARCISS is definitely dead and this
necessitates a return to the drawing board.
The genesis of the crisis:
The Republic of South Sudan unfortunately did not avoid the pitfall
most post-colonial African countries fell into on independence
-organizing power and politics based on personality, ethnicity and
regionalism instead of ideas and political programs.
We’ve somewhere attributed this to ideological poverty and the
paradigm shift the SPLM made in the nineties in the context of thawing
of the cold war and the collapse of Soviet Union. The recoil from
revolutionary politics to liberal and neo-liberal brought in its wake
the ethnicization of SPLM public power and authority.
The signing of comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) heralding the
independence as especially following the tragic demise of Dr. John
Garang de Mabior and the ascension of Salva Kiir Mayardit to the helm,
the assumption that it was Dinka power, started to take roots.
The witch-hunt against the so-called Garang’s orphans was to remove
from the SPLM/A hierarchy non-Dinka as well as non-Bahr el Ghazalians.
There was no way of removing Dr. Riek Machar and the Nuers. So, the
power configuration appeared Dinka-Nuer alliance in the political,
military and civil service.
It was taken for granted that the Dinka (Salva Kiir) would be
president because of their numerical weight. The Nuer (Dr. Riek
Machar) would deputize him and the Equatorian (James Wani Igga) remain
the Hon. Speaker of the National Legislature.
Translated into executive portfolios, in a cabinet of thirty, there
were sixteen Dinka, six Nuer, two Chollo, one Azande, one Bari and one
Balanda. This power arrangement engendered political exclusion,
discrimination and marginalization of the smaller ethnicities.
In the army, the Dinka had the highest numbers in the officers’ corps
while the Nuer were seventy percent of the soldiers.
The Dinka and Nuer controlled between themselves the civil service top
positions not based on merits but political patronage. Many Dinka and
Nuer people returning from the Diaspora especially US, Canada and
Australia had no knowledge of skills demanded by the senior positions
they occupied leading to paralysis of the system.
The political contradictions inherent in such a power configuration
were bound to erupt into violence. This occurred on 15 December 2013
with the target massacres of ethnic Nuers in Juba.
Initially, the perception among many South Sudanese was that it was a
Dinka-Nuer affair, explaining the indifference and lack of solidarity
with the Nuer victims. This neutrality remained until combative Dinka
ethnic nationalism now at the centre stage directing the war started
aggressing and provoking other ethnicities to take up arms.
In August 2015, the government of South Sudan, the SPLM in opposition,
the SPLM former political detainees, the other political parties, the
Women Group, the Faith based Group and Civil Society Organizations
signed the peace agreement.
In April 2016, the Transitional Government of National Unity (TGoNU)
was established. Barely two months in the implementation of ARCISS war
erupted again. Two factors contributed to this renewed war, namely,
were the Establishment Order 36/2015 (EO36/2015) and the refusal to
establish cantonment camps for SPLA IO in Equatoria and Bahr el
Ghazal.
The violent events in July 2016 leading to the collapse of both the
TGoNU and ARCISS have created new realities
The rise of Dinka ethnic nationalism, with its ideology of Dinka
(Jieng) ethnic supremacy über alles, and the formation of the Jieng
Council of Elders (JCE) as a power broker around President Salva Kiir
became the rallying point for unity of all Jieng sections and
subsections in what apparently has become a Jieng war against all
others.
This may appear simplistic, but the rise of Dinka ethnic nationalism
has efficaciously transformed the character of the conflict into a
‘Dinka war,’ in the guise of the government of South Sudan (SPLA),
against all other nationalities opposed to Dinka hegemony and
domination.
President Salva Kiir Mayardit admitted this in the Transitional
National Legislative Assembly (TNLA) on 19 October 2016 that “the
Nuers have rebelled and the other ethnicities refused or have
boycotted the SPLA and therefore I had nowhere to look for troops to
fight the war” (sic).
The upsurge of Dinka ethnic nationalism and the formation of the JCE
are sides of the same coin of right wing politics in South Sudan. It
is not the first time the Dinka political elites have fostered ‘Dinka
Unity’ as a counter to one of their number losing power.
The call for ‘Dinka Unity’ emerged in late seventies of the last
century in order to protect Abel Alier’s presidency of the High
Executive Council (HEC) in the defunct Southern Region. It has now
emerged as an important factor in the conflict to protect the power of
President Salva Kiir Mayardit.
However, unlike its past variant, Dinka ethnic nationalism (now
organized under the auspices of JCE chaired by Justice Ambrose Riiny
Thiik) has come against a backdrop of an alliance between the Dinka
politico-military-business elite – a parasitic capitalist class,
(Salva Kiir has nurtured since 2005) and the regional and
multinational comprador capitalism interested in the extraction,
development and exploitation of South Sudan vast natural resource
potential.
Consequent to, and through this alliance, President Salva Kiir
consolidated his hold on political and executive powers by engineering
a totalitarian regime as a vehicle to facilitate this extraction.
To accomplish this he had to paralyze the organizational and political
functions of the SPLM as the ruling party. Thus, instead of
institutionalizing, President Salva Kiir personified power and
governed through presidential decrees and orders.
He embarked on the formation of ethnic and regional caucuses in the
legislative and executive organs of the state and encouraged the
emergence of ethnic and regional associations and lobby groups as a
means of entrenching a system of political patronage.
In the course of a few years, the Dinka ethnic nationalism, Salva
Kiir’s kleptocratic totalitarianism, and the natural resource
extraction opportunities blended into an explosive admixture, which
drives the nefarious policy decisions fueling the conflict in South
Sudan.
These policy decisions like the Executive Order 36/2015 speak to this
explosive admixture in the context of capitalist utilitarianism in the
form of land for investment in mechanized commercial agricultural
farming and livestock ranching.
This makes the Order the most contentious piece of legislation. It not
only divides South Sudan into 28 dysfunctional states, but also awards
the Dinka 42% of South Sudan land area making it the most contentious
piece of legislation.
This order, through alteration of administrative boundaries and
creation of new states, dispossesses and transfers to the Dinka
ownership ancestral lands of other nationalities in Western Bahr el
Ghazal [Fertit in Raga] and Upper Nile [Chollo, Maaban, Koma and
Nuer].
This decision was not in response to explosion of Dinka population but
in a colonial pattern, to evict people, if necessarily by force of
arms, to make land available to foreign investors.
That it also permits pastoral Dinka communities unhindered access to,
and settlement with their herds in, sedentary agricultural areas in
Equatoria and Western Bahr el Ghazal has led to the growth of
anti-Dinka sentiments throughout South Sudan with the consequence that
innocent Dinka civilians were caught up in the fury.
The fallacy of existential threat:
The killing of innocent Dinka on the roads in Equatoria has prompted
some Dinka intellectuals, to raise the point that there is an
existential threat to Dinka people in South Sudan. This could not be
further from the truth.
If there is any existential threat in South Sudan, it is the smaller
ethnicities in Western Bahr el Ghazal who in addition to the
socio-economic and political exclusion, discrimination and
marginalization they have suffered over the decades, are now faced
with brutalization, dehumanization, physical and cultural extinction
consequent to annexation of Raga to some parts of Awiel.
The Acholi, Madi, Moro, Balanda and others face existential threat
consequent to destruction of their livelihood and culture. The
invasion by pastoral communities into their sedentary agricultural
ecology is an existential threat.
The Chollo are facing an existential threat from their Padang Dinka
neighbours who with the support of the government of South Sudan, in
the person of President Salva Kiir, are dispossessing them of their
ancestral lands on east bank of River Nile.
What I want to emphasize here is that it is the small ethnicities
because they do not possess economic or political/military power who
face this existential threat but not those large ethnicities in
possession of state power.
These intellectuals, some feigning liberalism, have raised the
existential threat only to justify their tacit support for Salva
Kiir’s totalitarianism. Many of these intellectuals were known
opponents of President Salva Kiir yet they refused to join the armed
opposition to the regime.
They have not condemned the horrendous crimes ‘Dotku beny’ and
‘Mathiang anyoor’ (Dinka militias) committed since 2013. They have
drummed up that due to this existential threat it has forced the Dinka
to rally behind Salva Kiir and the JCE.
This is thrash and the only credible explanation for this rhetoric is
ethnic solidarity. The truth is that the conflict has become one
against sixty-three and that by whatever magic, the one cannot win
against sixty-three.
This brings us to another disturbing reality linked to state formation
and nation building in South Sudan. The ethnic and regional dimensions
of the war are becoming prominent with the emergence and proliferation
of armed oppositions groups ethnic and regional in character.
The struggle against Dinka ethnic nationalism and the burgeoning
parasitic capitalist class, we categorized as the ‘explosive
admixture’, in the absence of a unifying ideological thrust renders
the three categories harbingers of South Sudan’s self-destruction.
This plays out negatively.
First, the presence of many separate and competing armed groups
without a political agreement to enable them cohabitate and operate
against the regime in close proximity is bound to generate frictions,
tensions and even violence. This occurred in January between the
SPLM/A (IO) and the newly formed (Dr. Lam Akol’s) National Democratic
Movement (NDM).
This weakened the two groups through loss of human life and military
hardware thus playing into the hands of the government. The least
thing opposition groups should do is to fight among themselves no
matter how difficult the situation.
Secondly, the ethnic backlash pushes to the background, if not into
the oblivion, the state formation and nation building objectives,
which raise the possibility of South Sudan disintegrating into
ungovernable pieces. The competing regional political, economic and
security interests will definitely accentuate this scenario.
The military presence in South Sudan of Uganda and Ethiopia might
encourage Kenya and the Sudan to send their troops under the guise of
maintaining peace ala Somalia while in fact they are balance their
respective interests.
Thirdly, proliferation of armed opposition spells their weakness thus
prolonging the life of the totalitarian regime. This will have the
negative psychological impact on the people, who politically and
ideologically, have not sufficiently prepared for a protracted war. As
their social and economic situation continues to deteriorate, in face
of the deepening economic crisis of the regime and famine, many of
them will flee into refuge in the neighbouring countries.
Fourth, in spite of the ethnic power fanfare and pride, the Dinka are
not culturally homogenous. There is latent power struggle between the
eastern (Bor) and western (Rek) Dinka, which could erupt into violence
as the social and economic situation become untenable.
This plays into the second scenario accelerating the disintegration
invoking the UN trusteeship peddled by some political leaders. UN
trusteeship of South Sudan will freeze without resolving the
fundamental contradiction, given the heightened ethnic furore.
What should be done?
South Sudan is going through an irreconcilable contradiction between
the totalitarian regime and the masses of the people. The emerging
ethnic character apart, the resolution of this contradiction will not
be on the basis of power-sharing and effecting superficial reforms in
the system.
The ARCISS is outmoded that any group hinging its hope on its
resuscitation will be courting the perpetuation of conflict. The
existence of many armed and opposition parties is indicative of the
multiple layers of the problem, which therefore necessitates its
deeper knowledge and scientific understanding.
It’s obvious we are aware of the problem facing the people of South
Sudan. What seems not very obvious to all the political groups is that
their continued independent actions work to prolong the suffering of
the people of South Sudan.
In August 2016, Dr. Lam Akol initiated what was then dubbed
“Consultative Meeting of the Opposition Groups.” It was one-step in
the right direction. The political leaders might want to take the
resolutions of that meeting a step further in the form of negotiating
a charter and programme for working together to remove the
totalitarian regime.
The region and the international community have no more policy tools
for unlocking the impasse and it will be defeatist to continue waiting
for them to come up with the solution while the regime is killing our
people as happened a few days ago in Magwe County in Eastern
Equatoria.
<< Older
16 Comments
The Spearhead
April 8, 2017 at 2:52 am
Peter Adwok Nyaba
If the political portfolios were made base on numbers; do you
think the Chollo people would have more than two positions of
leadership over the Azande, Balanda and Bari people? You only mention
six ethnic groups out of 63 tribes in South Sudan. You can’t speak of
being marginalized when you took more than two positions when the rest
of 57 tribes had none in the positions of leadership. You didn’t get
those positions just because you had a loud mouth but you had those
positions because you were available!
Reply
Eastern
April 8, 2017 at 6:08 am
Dear Dr. Peter Adwok,
This is an excellent and honest piece. How I wish you could
serialise such writings to help guide the search and discussions on
the political solution to South Sudan’s political problems.
Political ingenuity is not attained by amassing the number of
hours in political science class, it’s in born. Dr. Peter Adwok is
South Sudan’s political genius by all measures!
I will suggest that the regional leaders, I will refer to as
political naïveté, seek an audience with Dr. Peter Adwok for a “clear”
sneak peek, into the political cauldron of South Sudan. The aforesaid
leaders may have some understanding, but they just want to build
political capital from the status quo….
I recommend 40 hours contact hours for Mr. Festus Mogae with Dr.
Peter Adwok for lectures on the political history of South Sudan. This
will help the naive man from Botswana who once led that country!
Reply
info@southsudannation
April 8, 2017 at 3:06 pm
Eastern,
I am one of those South Sudanese who has been very skeptical
and unsure of the appointment of ex-president Mogae. I seriously doubt
if any Swazi, or Botswana leader ever knows much about South Sudan?
Mogae is now being obviously manipulated by the Makueis and
company because he is completely unfit, unsuitable and incapable.
Editor
Reply
Samuel Atabi
April 8, 2017 at 7:40 am
Dear Prof Adwok,
No one has ever accused you for mincing words; your latest
contribution attests to this. Over the last few years some of us have
shouted ourselves hoarse on the need for all the opposition groups to
hold a grand conference for unity (an equivalent of the Afghan “loya
jirgas”) against the tribal regime in Juba. Our effort is yet to bear
fruits. The meeting you talked of, that was organized by Dr Lam Akol
in Nairobi, was a hurried affair and had left out key players, like Dr
Riek Machar, who would have given a ballast to the wandering
opposition groups.
I do not understand the psychology of our leaders, in South Sudan,
or even in Africa as whole. There is a penchant among these leaders to
assume the air of being God gifts to the masses and to appoint the
least qualified to be their deputies. Dr Garang was guilty of this
cowardly attitude when he appointed Salva Kiir as his assistant,
thinking he could manipulate him: now see what has happened to us when
Kiir assumed leadership. Dr Riek Machar is also guilty of this disease
when he appointed a well-known con artist, Taban Deng Gai, as his
deputy. True his character, Taban has not only betrayed but has also
usurped the power of Dr Machar, with disastrous consequences.
All of those who think they can lead South Sudan should think
again and adopt the humility of the father of modern leadership, Moses
of the Bible. When God asked him to lead the Israelis out of Egypt,
Moses was humble enough to say that he was not up to the job; he was
not a good speaker. But God insisted and appointed his brother Aaron
to assist him. Moses also listened to and implemented the good advice
given by his father-in-law, Jethro. It was Jethro who advised Moses to
introduce decentralization of power in the executive and judicial
administration. In this way, Moses was able to take his difficult
people out of the bondage in Egypt. We all need to repent and be
humble to accept that we may not be good enough to lead our people and
encourage others who show true leadership to assume the role .
A friend of mine, while discussing the situation in South Sudan
with me recently quipped that, although the dictatorship now in Juba
cannot sustain the current unjust system and shows all signs of
imminent collapse, the way the opposition is splintering may make sure
that this “unsustainability” lasts for hundred years! A contradiction
of terms?
Reply
Peacemaker
April 9, 2017 at 3:31 pm
We should always take what our politicians tell us with a
pinch of salt. Politics is the game they play very well. Sometimes
with honesty and at other times unscrupulously to fit their intentions
and interest.
I’m rather dumbfounded to realize that someone in the caliber
of Dr. Nyaba could be as helpless as me and does not know the
direction the unpleasant events in the country is taking given his
position in the movement.
If I were him I would prefer to work in silence so as not give
the impression that the balance of power is shifting to Mr. Mayardit.
The one thing I know and sure of is that there will be no central
power in control the country by next July 2017. The country has
already began disintegrating even without firing a bullet.
Reply
info@southsudannation
April 9, 2017 at 5:41 pm
Peacemaker and others,
In fairness to Prof. Peter Nyaba, we’d be loudly
applauding his frankly precise albeit vitriolically bold writings and
opinions, which have shed a lot of light on the disastrous way this
tribal monstrosity, the SPLM/A, has been mismanaging the affairs in
this unfortunate and accursed nation of South Sudan.
In Chapter Four of his latest book, “South Sudan: The
State we aspire for,” he wrote that, ….”..the weakest survive the
political turbulence and contradictions and come to inherit power…,”
and that…”all members of the former SPLM Political Military Command,
which was virtually transformed into its current leadership hierarchy,
demonstrate a streak of intellectual and/or political weakness and
incompetence.”
“…that Kiir, Dr. John Garang’s long-time number-two man
(1992-2005), not because of ANY SPECIAL TALENTS BUT WHO, LIKE A
CATHOLIC MONK, PERFUNCTORILY RANG THE CHURCH BELL.”
Kiir as Dr. Peter Nyaba concluded, inherited the SPLM
leadership not by any special talent but by the ‘malice of fate.’
As you correctly inferred, the country has indeed began
its disintegration and what all those in opposition to the Kiir’s
tribal misrule must jointly do is to expedite this inevitable
disintegration and splintering of the varied regions into separate
nations.
What the NAS of General Thomas Cirillo has clearly spelled
out, South Sudan must be divided into three or more nations, each
separate …. the predicted ‘Balkanization’ which we’ve seen to have
succeeded in the case of former Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR). Now Europe has fully come
to recognize their wisdom and racial superiority that the White man is
more intelligent than the hopeless and block-headed Black man.
Whether its Bosnia, Macedonia, Czech, Slovenia, Bosnia,
Belarus, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan and so on, are all
successful nations. During the Olympic Games, each one of these
nations proudly carry their flags high.
Why can’t this hopelessly misruled country of South Sudan
be transformed into potentially successful and separate countries
called Upper Nile, Equatoria, Bahr el Ghazal, Western Sudan nation,
Boma nation, etc…?
Editor
Reply
William Dimo
April 8, 2017 at 11:00 pm
Truth never dies!
That’s precisely what happened in our country. Thank you Dr, Peter
Adwok for your insight and analysis.
South Sudanese intellectuals like you needs to speak out without
fear, because we need this truth as anew generation to learn from it
and understand that our leaders failed to implement peace at the same
time they failed to implement rules of laws and permanent
constitutional that undermine the powers to prevent the brutality of
president and its JCE not to commit crimes against civilians.
The failure of leaderships is a failure of the state and the
hatred tribalism of the authoritarian regime destroyed the dream of
our nation.
corrupt politicians who committed atrocities against civilians
will not escape justice and accountability.
All these massive killing of civilians all over South Sudan is to
scared other ethnic groups to silence.
The 64 ethnic in South Sudan could be divided
as the Dinka represent 10% and Nuer 9% and the rest 81% in our
population are 62 ethnic in South Sudan.
In which if all 62 ethnic took the same feelings of the two ethnic
groups that fight in the interest of ethnic, I believe the South Sudan
would change for better because currently these two groups think they
are everywhere and everything that is wrong thinking.
In a democratic values and principles they’re not majority to be a
threat to instability if the rest of 62 including those who love peace
from these two heads took up arms together as one with 62 to stop the
two camps of Kiir JCE and Riek. I believe peace would be prevail in
South Sudan and we would be able to develop our country.
Reply
False Millionaire
April 9, 2017 at 7:44 am
The intellectual elegance,the theme,the intentions and the
striking discriptions to the bone do not alter the fact that this
article is a reproduction of the former article that delt with an
alleged issue of,”jieng plan to rule south sudan for 200 years”.The
attention the former article had drown was such that it was highly
commented.It’s those comments which are still valid as expressions of
reaction to this article.
It’s most irresponsible to underestimate the danger the country
and the society have been exposed to and relish to display a stagnant
state of mindset.If the intention of this article is to incite the
masses into rebellon against one single tribe named dinka as a way of
overthrowing a dinka lead government in juba,that objective had
already been achieved and that makes of this article a waste of time
and effort.
Dr Nyaba forgets that he is an MTN apologist and proceeds to day
dream of dinka intellectuals joining the rebelion.This ranting should
never have been exoected of him giving the fact of him being a self
proclaimed revolutionary.He should know so much about those of
Lenin,of Mandela and of Ghandi.What we have in RSS is a heightened
inter communal struggles.The objective is to get to power.Once there
one turns around and call upon the rest of the tribes which were set
up to fight against one another to reconcile.Shamefully after an
immeasurable human suffering is inflicted.
The jieng intellectuals like Dr Lual Deng now sitting in Juba are
among the big fish to be eliminated in the list of MTN hunting.Even if
he is against Kiir and his rule,he has no choice than to sit and wait
for the sky to come upon him without any recourse to join the
murderous disguised as revolutionaries.
In reality,if the worse come to the worst,it isn’t the jieng who
are threatened with extiction.The tragedy would take many victims but
will still leave many jiengs surviving to keep living in RSS as they
have always done from the begining of the creation.
If an idea of a well defined and well structured rebelion for
common objectives couldn’t be formulated and put to work to
accommodate evey citizen,it’s best for the jieng not to join any
rebeilion but to work to form their own movement if they feel fed up
of Kiir’s regime as they are today.
Reply
Alex
April 9, 2017 at 5:37 pm
All the suffering in S. Sudan is brought by SPLA in Opp who are
fighting for power. We will not leave them to hijack any power by
force. They have worked hard with their backers to ethnicse the war
but they fail. We are now eyeing Pangak to be captured then bury the
IO movement for ever.
Reply
info@southsudannation
April 9, 2017 at 7:46 pm
Alex Londani,
Keep day-dreaming, you capture Pagak, they capture Yei,
Kajo-koji, and the circle goes on and on.
You need a political solution, preferably, something like what
happened to the former Yugoslavia…..divide up the country.
Besides, who ever said we were a ‘one-people?’ The stupid
British and Belgians just narrowly missed to curb out Equatoria into
the former East African Protectorate and the Belgian Congo.
Editor
Reply
alex
April 10, 2017 at 4:50 pm
Mr info
Read what your former IO army spokesperson say, IO is a
family business. It is only people like you when thrown a piece of
bone then, they begin to dance around Riack.
About capturing Kajokeji, Kaya, Yei and many other towns
you claim, better ask those journalist who have been to the camps in
Northern Uganda and let them tell you if it is true that indeed those
towns you mentioned is under SPLA in OP. You only deceive those who
relay on your fake news. I have access to many reliable sources of
news and you can only manage to deceive people with limited knowledge.
With the intransigence of IO you will see, soon we will bury this
party and you will regret. Your false believe is still driving you
wild but when the reality comes to table, that will be the time when
your head will be on fire.
Reply
Bismark
April 10, 2017 at 10:49 am
This is yet another important piece from a great leader from the
motherland. May God bless you and give you a long life. Please compile
all your stories about the country in form of a book for generation to
read as a part of liberation struggle.
Reply
Thon
April 10, 2017 at 1:31 pm
False Millionaire:
Rightly, you have hit the nail into the end game of Dr. Nyaba;
that is mobilizing all tribes against Dinka. that attitude does not
make Dr. Nyaba different from the Dinka intellectuals he called names.
Dr. Nyaba titles are different but have one aim to mobilize against
Dinka ethnicity as if the ongoing tragedy is not enough. The good news
is that IOs and other opposition armed groups, Dr. Nyaba confessed,
are weakened by lack unity among them and competition for leadership
on regional and ethnic basis. let us pray for peace in South Sudan
from its politicians, Nyaba and non-Nyaba.
Reply
mading
April 10, 2017 at 7:12 pm
Here, he come Hassan A .Trubai of South Sudan again. This Adwok is
so angry at Dinkas, because he is jealous of our numbers that he will
not be able to do us harm that he always intended in his heard. He
preached his anti Dinkas message last year, when it did not worked, he
went silent for a while. Now he is at it again but his evil deed
against Dinkas will not work this time like in the past. Adwok Nyaba
is angry at Dinkas Padang, because of the land dispute between Chollo
and Dinka Padang. Now he is acting like he is concerned about South
Sudan, but he has hidden agenda toward Dinkas.
Reply
info@southsudannation
April 10, 2017 at 8:09 pm
Mading,
What an irony! Isn’t it the jieng who have the ‘hidden agenda’
of occupation and forced displacement of other tribes from their
ancestral lands?
That is what’s happening in Padang, Parajok, Yei, Yambio and
of course, the blatant occupation taking place in so-called Jebel
Dinka in Juba.
Please, look at yourself and see where you are taking this
accursed nation.
Editor
Reply
Chief Abiko!
April 10, 2017 at 8:04 pm
Dear: Alex
You now putting the suffering of South Sudanese people only on
SPLA-IO. But,you distant yourself from the suffering of South Sudanese
people.Why you and Kirr are fearing Riak Machar to be on your
side?But,like A BIG SHEEHP. Taban Deng Gai on your side? Since Kirr
replaced him in Riak Machar place,Kirr,said the atmosphere is now
better without Riak Machar.He said he would implemented the peace talk
agreement that was signed 2015.
Now,the country is going to two-years without any implementation
at all! If you think that the government is going to crush Riak Machar
military,do it! Good luck!Your government in Juba,is under collapse!
Believe me or not! The ball is your court! You pick,or you leave!
Either way best for you! Back to you! No grudge on freedom of
expression!
Sincere Healing Anger!
Abiko!
Missouri,USA
Reply
Leave a Reply
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14ooNFF2xOv%2B8MGWbdpgGAy1Um62Prza2uOBCHxskspGF_Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
