No National Army in South Sudan: A Lesson learned from Malong’s sacking
May. 11 Featured, Uncategorized no comments     

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, Kampala, Uganda, MAY/12/2017, SSN;

On May 9, 2017 South Sudanese national army (SPLA) Chief of General
Staff Paul Malong Awan was fired by President, General Salva Kiir
Mayardit and replaced him with General James Ajongo Mawut.
Consequently, tension began to grow between the President and the
sacked general.

In fact, the tension was more exacerbated due to the fact that
soldiers were deployed on Juba streets and around the sacked General’s
home while plainclothes national security agents drove in and around
the capital telling people to go inside their houses (according to
www.southsudannewsagency.com/index.php/…/south-sudan-army-chief-sacked-2/).

As the government went on preparing for war as seen above, Malong was
preparing for peace. Therefore, he left Juba with intention of going
to his hometown, Aweil, the same night as a way of reducing tension.
However, leaving Juba was another problem as the government began
panicking.

That kind of hysterical behaviour shown by the Government stroke the
nation with fear and in particular, those who were overwhelmed with
fear were those along the path he was about to pass when he was going
to his home area, Aweil. The places that he was about to pass through
were: Yirol, Rumbek, Gok State, Tonji and other places he would have
passed as going to Aweil.

Many friends of mine I talked with in Rumbek in respect to the same
matter expressed the same fear of war breaking out at any time. This
was made worse when General Matur Chut laid the ambush to attack
General Malong if he had passed through Western Lakes.

Fortunately, the governor of Eastern Lakes, Bor Phillip and the
goodwill of the sacked General saved South Sudan from bloodshed. For
that reason there is a need to appreciate the two personalities for
the good work they have done.

Nonetheless, the incidence exposed the weaknesses on the side of the
government in Juba as it’s shown that it does not know how to handle
the matter. The same weaknesses explains the outbreak of 2013 South
Sudanese war, which is still ongoing now. Had the SPLM handled the
crisis within it at that time, the war would have been averted like it
is done now.

However, that was not my interest as my interest was not whether there
would be war or not but my interest was to see the reaction of “South
Sudan National Army.” I have put the word South Sudan National Army in
quotation because in reality there is no national army in South Sudan.

The above assertion was confirmed by what happened during the present
crisis as it has clearly exposed the true nature of the national army
of South Sudan. In short, there is no national army as I will give the
reasons shortly but first, what is the national army.

The term national army typically means the lawful army of the state as
distinct from rebel armies or private armies that may operate there.
For the army to be regarded as lawful, it must be established by law
of a country duly passed by the Parliament. In that respect, the
Transitional Constitution of South Sudan, 2011 in Article 151
establishes the National Army of South Sudan and its functions.

The functions of the National Army (SPLA) are to:
—(a) uphold the Constitution;
—(b) defend the sovereignty of the country;
—(c) protect the people of South Sudan;
—(d) secure the territorial integrity of South Sudan;
—(e) defend South Sudan against external threats and aggression; and
—(f) be involved in addressing any emergencies, participate in
reconstruction activities, and assist in disaster management and
relief in accordance with this Constitution and the law.

In order to perform the above functions, the national army must not be
controlled by an individual person or it must not owe allegiance to an
individual. The national army is other words must be there to protect
the nation but not the interest of any person including the president.

This was proved by the Egyptian Army in 2011 when it asked Muhammad
Hosni El Sayed Mubarak to step aside when people went on the street
demanding for his resignation. The same army did the same thing with
Islamist President, Morsi.

As explained above, where the army is national then it also strong
army. In addition, where the army is strong, there is also strong law
and rule of law. This has been observed by Niccolo Machiavelli in his
book, the Prince, “the main foundations of every state, new states as
well as ancient or composite ones, are good laws and good arms you
cannot have good laws without good arms, and where there are good
arms, good laws inevitably follow”.

I wished the President of South Sudan would read the Prince by
Machiavelli and put it into practice and had he done that South Sudan
would have had strong army and the good law.

It is also important to stress based on the above quotation that
without strong army, no matter how good the laws are there will never
be strong law. In simple term, strong army is the foundation of strong
law.

Nevertheless, with regard to South Sudan, there is no national army
and this is why there is no bad law. The weaknesses of the army of
South Sudan are rooted in the fact that the army is highly
politicized, polarized and composed of bunch of militias and
auxiliaries.

Thus, it is the fact that has been exposed by the removal of Former
Army Chief, General Paul Malong Awan which is troubling. The main
lesson learned about the nature of the army we have in South Sudan in
the recent incident is that our army is tribal army but not national
army. This is because a national army defends the nation not tribe
mate as seen in the case of General Malong.

When the army heard that Malong was sacked, many SPLA soldiers from
Aweil took their guns and followed him, which shows that the SPLA from
Aweil are not there for the interest of South Sudan but to protect
personalities. What saved South Sudan, however, was Malong not
National Army because the SPLA Army from Aweil was ready to shed blood
if Malong had not changed his mind to come to Juba.

The incident has also proved what happened in 2013 when the conflict
broke between Riek and Kiir. As soon as conflict started, all the SPLA
members from Nairobi ethnicity deserted the government in defense of
Riek. At the same time, Dinka SPLA members began targeting Nuer
members because of their ethnicity and moreover, both sides have been
accused of killing South Sudanese citizens because of their ethnicity.

In addition, the recent conflict between Bor and Murle and Bor and
Mandari, exposed the same fact that SPLA is not a National Army. This
was shown by the fact that the SPLA members from Bor Community
supported Bor Youth in killing Murle forgetting that they have a
national duty to defend South Sudan.

Defending South Sudan means defending citizens of South Sudan and all
people inhabiting South Sudan including Murle are citizens of South
Sudan. This further means that the SPLA has a duty to protect all
citizens where their lives are under threat.

In the same way to show that there is no national army, it is not
wrong to state from personal observation that almost all SPLM leaders
including the President are guarded and protected by their
tribe-mates.

In addition, people are appointed in the SPLA based on tribes not
because a person desires to serve the nation called South Sudan. The
SPLA has been turned into business and employment forum where generals
employed their own people leaving tribes without any generals out in
the army no matter how capable a person is.

Because of that the army is highly fragmented as all members have
different agenda and expectations.

In summary, as one of my friends observed sometime back and which I
have learned in the present crisis caused by the removal of General
Malong, I can simply conclude that there is no national army in South
Sudan.

What is there is not national army but something composed of militias,
auxiliaries, businessmen and women, untrained individuals.

All the above groups are made up of different persons with conflicting
loyalties and interests; hence they are always weak in protecting
interest of South Sudan since they put their interests or interests of
their tribe mates above the nation.

In order to have strong national army that puts the interests of South
Sudan above their own interests, the Government should sieve the
present army to find out who are really trained and who are not. Those
who are trained should be reoriented to take up responsibility of
protecting the nation not individuals. Then, those who are not trained
must be sent to the field for at least three years to undergo
intensive training.

If the above is not done, then, I am afraid, South Sudan will remain
weak in everything and people will continue to suffer as they bear the
brunt of negative force of bad governance caused by corruption, or
which causes corruption as the two are symbiotic.

Therefore, if there were a strong army and good law, then, the bad
governance and corruption would have been controlled and citizens lead
happy lives. As a result, South Sudanese would have lived in justice,
liberty and prosperity.

NB//: the author is Human Rights lawyer that can be reached through:
[email protected]

-- 
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/CAJb14oot-bk1X843aNVO7nrNd%2BTvZKBnaLcP%3DVY2S1VPLao8Gg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to