Perspectives On Opposition Unity And The Path To Peace
"In the final analysis, it is the calibre of domestic, regional, and
international leadership which will give shape to the preferred method
of addressing South Sudan’s hideous civil war."
20 May 2017
4 May 2017
By Dr Alfred Sebit Lokuji
South Sudan, the Big Questions: Opposition Unity? Talk Peace? Or Fight?
Opposition to Juba has grown from individual mutterings, to public
dissents by journalists, and now, to armed resistance. The incremental
opposition to Kiir’s regime should come as no surprise as this
government has shown no appetite for criticism from any quarters, and
worse, no intention to change its ways.
What might be a surprise to South Sudanese and the world is the
ruthless manner the Kiir regime has dealt with critics of all types.
As the case of Isaiah Abraham and others show, it will not hesitate to
silence critics by use of powers it has assumed upon itself: from
threats, to destruction of property, and finally murder.
It has reached unmeasured proportions, i.e. murders are carried out
without any pretence of judicial procedures as well as used as the
easiest deterrent to opponents. The alarming rate of recent murders,
burning and looting by government militias mimics ancient brutalities
of tribes that brought the Dark Ages to Europe; perhaps even worse!
What does Opposition to the Kiir Regime mean?
It is doubtful that there is a single soul in South Sudan or abroad
who has not dissented in silence – essentially assuming bystander
postures. The problem with this approach is that no one notices, and
it does not jump-start any corrective measures in the governance of
South.
Braver citizens have expressed their dissent by writing, or speaking
out. Depending on one’s location or past association with the state,
such dissent may either be tolerated or met with outright ruthlessness
expressed through kidnappings, murder and dumping of corpses on town
outskirts wherever convenient – ditches or into the Nile.
“Civil disobedience” is unknown in South Sudan and would most likely
be turned into a slaughter-fest by the trigger-happy forces of the
state. Increasingly, dissent has been expressed by “running away” –
either into the bushes as IDPs, or into exile.
This phenomenon has become dominant as pockets of villagers began to
resist invading cattle herders, backed by armed government militias
supporting their tribesmen. Clashes with government militias that
result in any defeat for them are inevitably followed by invasions of
the villages in question by troops who, upon arrival, simply shoot
anyone on sight, rape, loot, and burn! Cases in point: all villages
along Juba-Nimule Road, Bungu, Rokon, Lanya, Katigiri, Mundri,
Lobonok, Kajo-keji and incrementally, Parajok in Eastern Equatoria as
well as parts of Western Equatoria and Western Bahr el Ghazal – not to
speak of the brutalities in the main SPLM-IG vs. SPLM-IO theatres in
Greater Upper Nile.
Thus, by default, the ultimate opposition to Kiir has come to mean
taking up arms individually, or at best, as groups!
Organized opposition
Village self-defence forces, rather than being hailed by government,
are taken to mean rebellion against government – and more likely, as
hostility towards the Dinka! Thus, villagers in almost all non-Dinka
areas find themselves in a typical Catch-22 situation: if they defend
themselves they are butchered as rebels, and if they do not, they are
at the mercy of government forces who loot, ransack, rape, and murder
in a day’s work. These widespread phenomena have sown the seeds of
proper organized rebellions with varying capacities.
The SPLM-IO, treated as a Riek Machar property, and by extension a
Nuer outfit, has borne the brunt of this brutality while the world
watched or participated as in the case of Uganda! The SPLM-FDs are the
monkey wrench in the works – with some considered opposition, others
have become part of government, a few others retreating into private
life, leaving only a few giving weight to the muted idea of turning
South Sudan into a “UN Trusteeship!” an idea detested by most South
Sudanese.
Notable among individuals who have declared movements seeking the
removal of the Kiir regime are Dr. Lam Akol (The National Democratic
Movement, NDM), and ex-governor Joseph Bakasoro (The South Sudan
National Movement for Change, SSNMC). Others are at best brief-case
outfits that may, in time, become entities to reckon with.
The National Salvation Front: Then, of course, there is the National
Salvation Front (NSF) which prefers the acronym “NAS” as this suggests
a “people-orientation” in Juba Arabic! Perhaps quite distinguishable
is the founder of NAS, a highly trained and self-disciplined military
officer, Lt. General Thomas Cirillo Swaka. He brings to play the
substantive issues which disqualify the Kiir regime from continuing to
rule South Sudan: tribal militias instead of a national army –
complete strangers to the rule of law; personalization of national
wealth; worthlessness of human life; and the withering away of
national governance institutions!
Remarkable among the strengths of Thomas Cirillo Swaka is a
demonstrated outright rejection of sectarian interests, especially in
building a national military; and, a keen distinction between the
Kiir-JCE Jieng regime, from the innocent bulk rank-and-file Jieng, who
may even suffer more – besides having their noble traditional cultures
negatively portrayed by Kiir’s militias!
How the Kiir regime should be opposed: peacefully, or forcefully? For
victims of the regime who have experienced brutality through the
lenses of burnt huts and charred human bodies, including those of
their own family-members, the unanimous response is the application of
Hammurabi’s Laws (eye/eye, etc)!
For those more conscious of international politics: “by any means necessary”!
For yet others more, including international bystanders expressing an
abhorrence of war, peace should be attained by “peaceful
negotiations”!
Ironically, the Kiir regime determines, through its actions, the
method of choice for solution of this national tragedy. In the final
analysis, it is the calibre of domestic, regional, and international
leadership which will give shape to the preferred method of addressing
South Sudan’s hideous civil war.
Peaceful Negotiations: Common sense demands that forcefully removing
Kiir from office and establishing a more humane regime requires
cooperation, at the least, and unity at best – historically a rare
commodity among South Sudanese opposition factions.
Change through peaceful negotiations, on the other hand, the
internationally preferred method of settling the South Sudanese war,
is popular and generally lacks the muscle to ensure compliance with
what has been agreed upon. The ARCSS is an excellent illustration of
this lack of political will, even among its international sponsors, to
hold parties to the agreement accountable, especially for
non-compliance. Kiir and his mega-watt speakers Michael Makwei and
Paul Malong, among others, made it very clear that they opposed the
ARCSS. Kiir has been reliably reported as telling his military High
Command that he had no intention of honouring the ARCSS, advising them
on procedures they could use to make Juba town appear demilitarized as
per the ARCSS. Thus, with the help of the international community,
Riek Machar was lured into Juba town without adequate security
procedures as per the ARCSS.
Consequently, the events of July 2016 were used to disregard his place
in the ARCSS, and without any qualms, replaced with a more malleable
partner in the person of one Taban Deng Gai.
To add salt to injury, Kiir proceeded to make constitutional changes
at will – such as the creation of more states in addition to the
constitutional 10.
The big question this leaves in the minds of many a would-be party to
negotiations with the government is: What use is it wrangling over
numerous issues, reaching consensus with difficulty, and then ending
up with unilateral non-compliance without as much as a sound of
dissent and disincentives?
Partners to Peace Talks and What Principles: As acknowledged above,
the international community prefers, as Kiir goes on murdering
innocent citizens that resolution should be sought through peaceful
negotiations. A question that immediately arises has to do with the
number of parties to any new agreement! Would they all agree on the
principle objectives for any peace-talks and above all, agree on the
final governance outcomes after such talks.
As hinted earlier, a post-Kiir government must, at a minimum, be able
to fulfil a range of quite ambitions principles and undertakings above
and beyond those suggested by the ARCSS. The following are key (but
not exhaustive) to any unity of the opposition:
Establishing security of every person and property across the
entire nation – breaking down myths about historical hostilities such
as in cattle-rustling!
Ensuring adherence to the rule-of-law for the all, high or low!
Establishment of a highly trained and disciplined national
citizens’ defence force that reflects the face of every South
Sudanese.
Enacting a federal, democratic constitution anchored on the
equality of every nationality regardless of numbers.
Constitutional de-horning the executive in such a manner as to
establish a balance of power, through checks and balances, of the
Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary.
Guarding public resources, in cash or in kind, with a hawk’s eye
and ensuring accountability without regard to social, political or
economic stature.
Upholding the human and legal obligations to citizens, especially
with regards to their basic rights and basic needs through deliver of
services.
Holding all, without exception to anyone, to being accountable for
any new, present or past acts of abuse of human rights, fraud against
the nation or against individuals or groups through appropriate legal
procedures – thus returning all assets thus far unlawfully acquired;
this being a conditionality for holding public office.
Ensuring that appropriate public institutions, standing or ad hoc,
are established to return the Republic of South Sudan to the path of
sanity and development.
For emphasis, setting the nation on a healthy path of human
development will entail detailed well-crafted plans, implementation
and review, where necessary – constantly on guard to ensure that the
nation is never again derailed from the path of international decency
for all its citizens. Any individual or group that does not agree to
such a minimum range of principles raise questions about its validity
as legitimate partners and guardians of the public interest.
Leadership: Regardless of what path is followed to bring peace to
South Sudan and place it on a solid path to a productive and contented
life for all its citizens, this will not be easy without an equally
dedicated, disciplined, conscientious, and scrupulously
service-oriented leadership. Thus, regardless of the non-military
quest for peace, South Sudan needs a future leader that is not greedy
and material-accumulation oriented; a leader that unites all the
tribes through highly transparent and democratic laws and procedures
that bind all citizens.
Prominently, a leader is needed that will not be deluded into a
campaign of revenge against those supposedly associated with the
illegitimate Kiir regime upon its becoming defunct. NAS believes it
has such a leader, proven by his actions in the military, and in
theatres from Kapoeta, to Morobo, Yei, and the NDA front. Anything
else risks new blood-thirsty tyrants who may adopt a revenge agenda
that is pre-fixed by a term that has gained wide political popularity:
“it is our turn!”
It behoves the neighbours of South Sudan, IGAD, the AU, the Troika,
the EU and the UN to look outside the box as they pursue solutions
through the niceties of diplomacy. The relevant and lasting solutions
for South Sudan maybe found outside the box! Foremost, the best
solutions are those that are rigorously implemented, with clear
consequences for truancy!
Posted in: Opinions
--
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/CAJb14ooyb%3D8t4id%2Bswu3wU%2BvjXyykprtVv7kW-VC%2BaKbkYk0HA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
