Tuesday, Feb 9th, 2010 18:46 UTC
ar rss
Home page > Comments > Last minute investments can never stop south Sudan’s call for (...)

Last minute investments can never stop south Sudan’s call for secession

Thursday 12 November 2009 printSend this article by mail

By Justin Ambago Ramba

November 11, 2009 — It is an undeniable fact that the South Sudan that has just emerged from the two decades long civil war remains one of the least developed places in the world. But of course though the war is to blame for the underdevelopment, yet it should also be recognised that the people of South Sudan actually took up arms and fought the successive Arab and Muslim dominated central government of Khartoum in reaction to lack of any tangible developmental programs in the region.

The Comprehensive Peace Agreement signed between the dominant National Congress Party of President Al Bashir and the former rebels of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/ Army in 2005 did promise among other things, packages of fast development in this neglected and war ravaged region with the hope of winning the Southern Sudanese voters to opt for a united Sudan come the referendum on self determination in 2011. However to everybody’s dismay, while the referendum is barely 15 months away, no any tangible and convincing development has been carried out in Southern Sudan, a thing that coupled with the scarcity of resources, widespread insecurity and a weak law enforcement institutions, the majority of the citizens are made to still live in conditions more worse, even than during the war time.

Now given the fact that there is a mounting demand in southern Sudan for secession from the North, many within the Sudan, the neighbouring Arab countries, the international community who had looked for the unity of the Sudan as a better option for both sides are now made to review their positions. And some optimistic voices can still be heard here and their calling for the maintenance of a united Sudan with the vision that if the political will can be secured, the most needed development in the south can still be achieved within the left one year period and that it can succeed to make the choice of unity attractive to the Southerners.

However given the history of the Sudanese North/South conflict one finds it extremely difficult to imagine how the above optimism can be made to come true. South Sudan is a very vast area covered with jungles and difficult terrains, and to think of building roads, railway lines, hospitals, schools, mechanized agricultural schemes, factories, safe clean drinking water etc are all issues that need huge money and the challenge of achieving them all over South Sudan in a time scale before the referendum that is scheduled for January 2011 even makes it the more of an impossibility. And it is in fact this, which makes other people to conclude that there is NO time left to make the unity of the Sudan attractive.

But what I would like to stress here is the fact that to many South Sudanese the secession of the South is something that can no longer be put aside for any developmental projects. And since the signing of the CPA it has been made clear that the issue of providing development in the South was already entrusted to the GoSS and practically the government of national unity in Khartoum (GoNU) has seemed never to have had any developmental plans in the South. Even those projects which used to be known as national projects were no longer existing or may be just on papers. With the US$ 8 billion dollars that was spent by the GOSS should it have been done so in the right way the South would have now looked much different? But as we are all aware of the corruptions and weak government performance in the South, coupled with the widespread impunity, our politicians have rather concentrated on building up themselves using the public money. It is an open secrete that all our leaders with only few exceptions, are owing huge mansions in far places like the USA, Canada, United Kingdom, Kenya, Uganda, South Africa, Khartoum , Beirut and many other parts of the world.

In the light of the above failures of the GoSS to provide the expected CPA dividends and its rudimentary ways of addressing the widespread inter -tribal violence as well as the famine that has now struck vast areas of this semi autonomous region, the future of Southern Sudan remains completely unpredictable. However for the NCP which has always enjoyed a rough relationship with the SPLM, the latter’s failures was immediately looked at as an opportunity to win over South Sudan to vote for unity. But as time went by the voices calling for secession of the region contrary to the northerners expectations grew louder and louder. And this new development has in fact pushed the NCP to drag its feet even the more on the implementation of the remaining articles of the CPA especially so are the demarcation of the North / South boundaries particularly in the oil rich areas and it has also delayed the passing of the other bills e.g. the referendum bill with declared intension of making it difficult if not impossible for the South to secede.

The paradox remains that while the North is not really interested in genuine share of power and wealth with the South, it continues to counteract any calls for the South’s option at the referendum to opt for secession. The North is not really concerned with any underdevelopments neither losses of innocent lives in the South as they themselves played theirs roles in both cases and are still doing so even after the supposed peace agreement. The North is in fact interested in the Oil of the South. The CPA gave them 50% of the Oil revenues from the southern fields, but once the agreement is over in 2011 and if the South remains a part of the united Sudan, the NCP together with the other northern political parties are bent to use the disputed Census figures to redistribute the national wealth whereby the south will be forced to receive no more that 20% of the Oil revenues and its representation in the national parliament and government, where crucial policies are passed will also decline to a similar percentage below the current 33%.

People should have also learned from how the international community has shunned away from living up to its promises of committing a US$ 4 billion worth of developmental projects in South Sudan as it was declared during the CPA signing. The UN on its part brought in a peace keeping force which at most is only keen on observing and reporting but the complex situation on the ground where one ethnic group is pitied against the other remains out of their mandate just the same as it all happened in Rwanda and Kosovo and Bosnia genocides. Equally so is when South Sudan comes out victoriously in the 2011 as an independent state , the North backed by Egypt and the whole of the Arab league and all the conferences of the Islamic world will join forces to suppress this democratic choice and for sure that Sudan will slip back yet into another deadly civil war.

While those who still entertain the idea of one unitary Sudan, are far more day dreaming if their belief is based on the illusion that being close to the North or Egypt or even the Arab League may bring development to South Sudan. The North and its Arab allies had more than half a century to invest in South Sudan, but they chose not to do that. This takes us back to what was once said by late Joseph Oduho, that “the Northern rulers in Khartoum are not sure whether developing the South Sudan is really the right thing. They seem to be divided on the issue. Some say leave them undeveloped and hungry and the Southerners will all migrate to look for jobs in the North and above all they will come to believe and accept that they can not survive on their own without the North. While others maintain that to contain the continuous resentment in the South, a certain degree of development projects have to be in place specially using the Arab Oil funds. This they expect to sell the friendship of the Arab world down to the South and even beyond targeting the other countries in the interior of Africa. The assumption here is that the developments meant should not be of the magnitude that would stir the quest of a separate nationhood in the South, but just enough to keep them within the Arabs control thus perpetuating the chronic state of slavery that South Sudan have been reduced to in the eyes of these bloody thirst Arab Muslims of the Middle East as headed by the greedy Egypt. Late Oduho concluded by saying that, “These Arabs have really got themselves into a problem, because if they develop the South, then it will become and easily secede and if they do not then it will always take up arms to fight the injustices and eventually secede”. “This I call the northern Arabs dilemma”. He concluded.

As for Egypt, its policies is driven by its interest in the Nile water and thanks to God that they do not have the hidden western diplomacy to hide behind. Southern Sudanese for that matter know exactly how the Egyptians think as more than two millions of its citizens has lived in Egypt at different times over the last fifty years. History is also there to tell us that it was Egypt, motivated by its interests that conspired with the Othman and the British to hold Sudan into captivity. It can also be taken as a logical deduction that Egypt was behind the reversion of the “Closed District Act”, which allowed the condominium rule to govern over South Sudan as separate entity from the North with the ultimate goal of later declaring it as either a part of its independent East African Colonies, preferably incorporated in unity with Uganda or to be on its own as a separate independent state of south Sudan.

As Egypt ‘s relationship with our fellow East Africans through who’s soil the giant Nile flows remains an area of uneasiness , the whole scenario of the Egyptian involvement in South Sudanese politics can never be any clearer that what the South can in terms of securing the Nile water for Egypt. South Sudan is no any different from Uganda, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and the Congo. Anthropologically and culturally these are one great black African people only divided by the boundaries drawn by the colonizers in which Egypt played a part. This brings us to the natural conclusion that if Egypt insists that our kinsmen in the forth mentioned countries should starve to death since the climate change has brought in a large scale drought and yet these countries are not allowed to develop an irrigated agricultural schemes to produce the badly needed food, then Egypt is playing a game of a total genocide on the black East African population of the Nile basin with South Sudan included. Yes it is this very Egypt that bribed the British into annexing South Sudan into the Middle Eastern region in order to guarantee its wickedness in playing about with the Nile water agreements.

Egypt will not in any way be allowed to repeat its fossil and non productive strategies in South Sudan after it has dramatically failed in Northern Sudan. If the North sacrificed their people in Old Wadi Halfa where the Aswan High Dam after its construction resulted in complete submersion of a whole civilization leaving the Northern Nubians homeless and self inflicted IDPs, the same can not be allowed to repeat itself in the Jonglei State of South Sudan ( over our dead bodies !). What did the Nubians of Halfa got in return is an eye opener to the people of Jonglei. They may promise the people of Jonglei state a branch of the Zagazig University with all its political zigzags, a handful of generators and some rudimentary health facilities. But remember that their security, intelligence and spying agents will always be attached to these facilities with the ultimate goal of manipulating the local politics in the interest of Egypt. As the Egyptians worked hard to hold the Northern Sudan under its feet, they would also do the same with the Southerners and for their interest they will never ever want to see a self sufficient and well developed South Sudan for the mere fear that such a country with all its vast resources, if ever allowed to become a strong nation, then the Egyptian superiority over the Nile basin will be gone if not compromised.

This article is not meant to discourage any Arab controlled business from investing in South Sudan. However whosoever entertains the idea of ever investing in this region, he/she must see to it that it is the business part that southern Sudanese would like to see translated into development and away from any political manipulations. Understand it that none of your investments can ever compromise the South Sudanese’s choice of secession from the North. Do you your business in the traditional professional way and get your profits at the end of the day.

Before I could wind up I would like to shade light on how some dirty political manoeuvres that may negatively impact on the socio-political fabric of South Sudan if it has already not done so. The cunning behaviours of the dominant Islamic NCP has for the first time become overtly clearer when it succeeded to hatch an alternative SPLM/A of its own making under the leadership of Dr. lam Akol Ajawin. This new party is a mutant of the original and has resemblance to the mother party especially so in sharing of the new Sudan vision of their late God Father Dr. Garang de Mobior. Hiding behind such outdated slogans and intimately sharing of political strategies with the northern political parties especially those whose ideology revolves around the creation of a religious state makes both SPLM factions irrelevant to any true South Sudanese nationalist.

And to prove all analysts right, this new party has also inherited amongst so many things, the genes of creating its own military wing. However if this is true, then the ultimate mission of SPLM-DC/A would be to liberate South Sudan from SPLM/A. This one here is quite a tricky one and for the sake of democracy should be handled carefully. And if at all the SPLM-DC is made to form its military wing in order to deter any SPLM’s use of the SPLA as a harassment tool against its political rivals (where SPLS is supposed to have become the national army of south Sudan without any political affiliations and with no role to play in internal South Sudanese politics), then the implication is that the Lebanonization of Southern Sudan has already reached a high level and possibly sooner than later it will extend to involve the other political parties. Look out for the different uniforms as we head towards multi-party , multi-military system!!

It can not be over stressed any further that the new realities on the ground in South Sudan clearly signifies that the people overwhelmingly prefer to have there independent country right now and not tomorrow. However due to the sprouting military groups and tribal militias, this part of the world is steadily heading towards another man made disaster that can even be made worse if South Sudan I still to remain a part of Khartoum to be governed by those who are currently in power struggle in the name of power sharing.

It is the authors belief that the unlikelihood of maintaining a peaceful, united Sudan through the initiation of the much talked about, “last minute developmental projects” in southern Sudan while we are already in the midst of a looming major insecurity which no doubt is destined to engulf every inch of the region very soon, I can see that this unlikelihood remains a reality that will come to pass.

Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba, MB, BCh, DRH, MD. Secretary General of the United South Sudan Party (USSP). The party that stands for the independence of South Sudan. Can be reached at either justinramba@doctors.org.uk or justinramba@aol.co.uk

reply

50 Forum messages

  • Last minute investments can never stop south Sudan’s call for secession 12 November 2009 02:59, by Mr Famous Big_Logic_Boy

    Those who call unity of Sudan are concern that northern Sudan will lose development, because if South gets independence then there is chances of NCP looting the oil from South. The same that Durfurian will will our game of breaking away from Sudan, because they suffer the same pain like Southern, their resources been used by arabs to eliminate with them. Now both sides are aware of arabs game. Equatorians have fresh every South Sudanese with their wise idea since 1955, and Durfurians have come to realised how clever we are. What i am is that we in South must change the way we behave and treat others, balance must be maintain in all aspects, because if we keep ignoring the negative activities, then there is a chance that some people will option for Enterprise Risk Management (ERM).

    reply

    • Dear Dr. Ramba I think you are mixing between the NCP and the North,well the North is not synonmous with the NCP. The people in the North are no less African than those in the South. Look at the African Union,would you deny that,Algeria,Libya,Maurtiania,Tunis,Libya,Morocco are African countries,members of both the UN Economic Commission for Africa and the African Union? 80%of the Arabs live in Africa. We may want an indepenent state in South Sudan,but not to be dominated by Museveini’s Uganda.

      reply

      • Dear Mr. David Glenn>

        Thanks for your comments. Well you think that I am mixing between the NCP and the North. But within the context of the North/South civil wars that sterted back on 18th August 1955 in the gration Town of Torit in South Sudan, any polirical group that dominated power in Khartoum has been protecting the interest of the North as opposed to the rebels who were fighting for the rights of the South. So the North is always in any North /South political issues has always been represented by those who dominate the government of the day in Khartoum, which now happens to be the NCP.

        Anyway as a clear cut secessionist who believes in the total Independence of the South I wont really waste much time in the details of which northerner is which, though of course I am well versed about all the nitty gritty of the northern sudanese, be it cultural, social or political. Mind you I served as a Medical doctor in different parts of Nothern Sudan for almost twenty years, so I guess you understand what I am talking about.

        Again you went out to ask my view on a whole list of countries: Algeria, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, as to whether a doubt their Africanness? However this must have been a thought that crossed your mind before you could come up with this list in particular and why these countries specifically out of all the other countries in the African continent? You surely have an answer .

        Yes my friend these countries though exist within the African continent and are by default members of the AU, you should not forget that they player greater roles in the Arab League more than they do so in the AU. The believe in an unvisible world, known as the "Arab World", which extends across the two continents of Africa and Asia. and though you rightly put it, 80% of the Arabs live in the African Continent, but their hearts are still far away in the Middle East.

        I have several experiences when I was an undergraduate in Egypt, as a had my first medical Degree from Kasr Al Aini Medical School, Cairo University, in Egypt. and even the Egyptian strongly believe that they are Arabs and we those who come from sub Saharan African are the Africans> how much more would you want me to have understood the Arab psychic?

        My friend, just lie assured for the Independent South Sudan Nation that wev are struggling to declare in South Sudan will never be dominated by the "Museiveni’s Uganda" as you put. And for that matter even the current tribal dominations will be dealt with ruthlessly even if that means reducing our population by half to achieve a south Sudan that is for all. WE are seceding from the North because we do not want to succumb to any domination, and we will continue to fight against any kind of domination be it from within our borders or from across.

        Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba, MD.

        reply

        • Dear Dr.Ramba Thank you very much. I understand and respect your position as regards secession,however i wish to stress that the NCP does not represent all the people of North Sudan same as SPLM/A does not represent all the people of South Sudan.Both parties recognize that and hence the referandum.A democratic process so that the people will have their say. The relation between African and Arabs is deeply rooted in history.Haggar(Hajir),the mother of Ishmaeil(Ismail),ancestor of the Arabs is a Nubian Princess,according to the Bible. Dear Brother I am very disturbed by your statement that "you are ready to reduce the population of the South to half",what do you mean by that. thank you,

          reply

  • Mr Justin Ramba.

    You should not talk about something that you are not sure about. SPM-DC should pursue you for that. This street language. Just you heard from selfish people that SPLM-DC has military then you copied as yours,while you are not sure.

    This is word "vision" killed tow millions for nothing. It should be left for those looters,because they are the one who found it and they proved by their action. Look at Upper Nile state now what can you say,if I say zero has been done there while Bor and El Barghazal are developing themselves with oil money which is belong to Upper Nile. Upper Nile should separate it from those states.

    reply

    • LEADERSHIP CRISIS IN NUER COMMUNITY:

      Today, it’s worrisome that the greater Nuer community is full of politicians and severely short on leaders. It’s even more troublesome that some of the self-proclaimed leaders, the like of one of the Islamic National Front darling golden boys, Riek Gai Kok and the so-called professor, David de Chand, are pouring venom into the good name and reputation of the Nuer people, who neither elected them, nor authorized them to sell the South on their behalf.

      Clearly, there is a thick line between a politician and a leader. Tavis Smiley, a nationally syndicated TV and Radio personality in the African-American community said that: " Leadership is not an " I " proposition. It’s a " you " proposition. When you do that, the public elevates you. They give you their trust. They hold you accountable.

      Southern Sudanese are all too familiar with Reik Gai Kok and David de Chand, particularly the former. Who would have forgotten the statement he made, a few years ago - standing along side Dr. Ammer Mussa, the Secretary General of the Arab League, when he claimed that: " Southern Sudan is part and parcel of the Arab and Islamic Nation.

      Mr. Kok, who continues to allow himself to play the role of the cleaning boy of the dirty under gourmands of his lovers in the terrorist regime of tyrant Omar Al Basheer, made a similar claim- just three weeks ago, in Alray Alaam Arabic daily newspaper, that: " The Dinka land of Abyie, belongs in the Northern Sudan.

      Now, what do the Nuer people think about this crime being committed by someone with an adjective of a Nuer leader? Isn’t shameful that one of us would utter such a deadly calling that not even our worst adversaries will never dare repeat? how about the general rule that says: If a crime is being committed in front of you and, you do not do anything about it, that you are intact as guilty as the criminal as well? And why - in the World - would the Nuer community allows these people to roam around ripping apart the Nuer reputation and good name?

      Riek Gai Kok has every right to go to bed and spend the knight with whomever he pleases. But he must do so under his own name, and the Nuer people out of it all.

      Concerning the so-called professor David de Chand- just look at how he calls himself. This’ a guy who can not even read his own hand-writing. His logic-respectively, is that of a fifth-grader. I live here in Atlanta, Ga. where he claims to have had obtained his questionable PH.D. Please don’t take my words for it. But any Southerner, Nuer in particular, who were here during that time, know the whole truth about it. I plan to bring that to the open in the very near future.

      Nuer community needs to pull together one more time. We, and only we, are the ones to look after our good name and reputation. And in this case, we didn’t.

      reply

      • Dear Dr. Ramba,

        Excellent article. Those who called for the so-called New Sudan Vision to keep Sudan united such as late Dr. John Garang de Mabior could not even speak or write in Arabic. He grew up in Tanzania after running away from his village in Turalei. He didn’t understand the mentality of the northern Sudan arabs. Those of Dr. Riek Machar and Joseph Oduho knew it best. Such leaders who got educated in the north understood the northern mentality better than any one else. They knew the gap that divides the north and the south could never be bridged. Dr. Garang thought that by just copying the western style of democracy and pasting it in Sudan this would be an easy thing. He however regretted when he said the north is "too deformed to be reformed" and joined self-determination in 2002 which he fought against since 1991.

        I like the quote from late uncle Joseph Oduho which concluded by saying that, “These Arabs have really got themselves into a problem, because if they develop the South, then it will become and easily secede and if they do not then it will always take up arms to fight the injustices and eventually secede”. “This I call the northern Arabs dilemma”.

        May God rest his soul in eternal peace. He died on the right side of self-determination when he was murdered by anti-South elements in the old SPLM/A. Those who were chasing the wind have now joined in the quest for independence of the South. Shame on them!

        reply

        • DOOR,

          You should talk of your Dinka politicians or leaders before jumping to Nuer community. Chief Majok of Abyei was the one who sold Abyei to northern Jalaba. His son Dr. Francis Mading Deng is echoing his father’s sell-out position that Abyei belongs to the North. These are Dinkas particularly from Abyei. So why is it more important that what Riek Gai says about Abyei raises your eye brows than what the Dinka themselves say about Abyei?

          What about Bona Malual? What about the sell-out old man called Abel Alier who even denied Abyei geographical constituency and refused to list countries with southerners to vote in the elections. He only listed Arab countries. What about George Kongor who had been serving NCP as Vice President and planned massacres against the South during the war? What about Professor Moses Machar who served the NCP during the war? And the list goes on long....

          So, Mr. clean your own house first.........

          reply

          • Gatwech:

            The principles of Realpolitik assume a primary position in this case: interests defined in terms of power provide the spring of action; Those treacherous men are motivated towards consolidating their position within the political environment.. even if it means betraying their populace.

            It’s time to classify those who are collaborating with the enemy here and now- Dr. Francis Mading Deng, and those who have collaborated with the enemy in the past- Dr. Riek Machar as individuals, so as to deny collaborators the shield of their tribes.

            Would you not agree?

            reply

            • Khent,

              If signing an agreement with jalaba is what you called Riek Machar’s collaboration, then don’t forget late John Garang and Salva Kiir. They all signed the agreement with Beshir, ate with him on the same table, baptized by Beshir as his deputies, etc.

              reply

              • Gatwech:

                I don’t blame you for being upset at your lies being exposed. Moronic gibberish is what you offer in lieu of evidence.

                Reading your posts, is analogous to watching the special Olympics, without the "feel good" elements.

                Do not confuse Dr. John Garang’s attainment of his political position by the virtue of military success, with Riek’s schizophrenic and confused attitude towards liberation, in which he cooperated with the SAF in fighting the SPLA.

                On the question of appointments to political positions.

                Your entire argument depends upon PRETENDING NOT TO UNDERSTAND the difference between the attainment of positions, as a consequence of the war effort and those appointments based on ad-hoc, transient, hollow and expedient appointments that are predicated entirely on the whims and wishes of the enemy.

                Do you not know the difference? To you it all sounds the same.

                Prove to us that you are not as clueless as you appear to be, -explain the difference- between the two.

                Perhaps you can point out which aspects of my post regarding Riek’s military collaboration with the enemy reflect ’inherited lies’ and why, and then provide your material to the contrary.

                Riek’s previous military collaborations with the government undermined his claim to head an anti-Khartoum, pro-independence Southern movement.

                reply

        • Gatwech:

          Those men ’understood’ the north so well, that they were lampooned into engaging in military operations against their own brothers in the SPLA.

          Their ’agreements’ with the enemy were dishonoured due to their reliance on the enemy for weapons, ammunition, and supplies.. yes they were a smart bunch, weren’t they?

          Riek allowed the SAF safe passage through territory controlled by Nasir to attack the SPLA. The split in 1991, and the material support that Khartoum offered the Nasir faction, enabled the government to regain the military initiative.

          So you are now denying that Dr. John Garang spoke Arabic? This is an example of the level of desperation you’ve sunk to. Dr. John Garang actually spoke Arabic quite well.

          Dr. John Garang NEVER ran away from his home. This unfounded assertion is another example of your lies.

          I confess to some interest in the processes by which you keep your lies floating in your mind.

          Your posts on the late Dr. John Garang are examples of ad nauseum fallacy.

          Ad nauseum fallacy -> repeating claims as if repetition were proof.

          You are simply attempting to foster a lie, by repetition. The reason why this is a flaw in reasoning is that the validity or truth of an idea has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with how often the idea is repeated.

          You can repeat something dozens of times and it will still be false, while a truth remains a truth even if it is stated only once

          All I ask is that you bring evidence and not noise. Why is it that your post consists only of rhetoric, but not of actual evidence of any kind?

          You’re clueless and are unable to distinguish a round peg from a square hole. This is why you’re reduced to justifying the injustifiable. You should really take your mindless prattle elsewhere.

          Again:

          Riek Machar had very little to show for his collaboration with the enemy. In 1995, Dr. Riek Machar was the leader of a virtual movement, lacking any real substance or coherence.

          The government to whom Riek and Paulino Matip served, fostered a devastating power play between the two men, resulting in the intensifying of insecurity in what was supposed to be a government-held area- this powerplay served the government’s purpose in neutralising the Southern guerrilla factions best positioned to interfere with the exploitation of the Bentiu oilfields.

          Matip had maintained a somewhat autonomous military and economic base in his Bul Nuer territory near Bentiu. As a Major-General in the Sudanese army, he had direct access to military supplies. In reality, Riek had more need of Matip than Paulino of Riek, and Riek’s subsequent attempt to put his own man in the governorship of Western Upper Nile, resulted with Paulino’s troops taking and sacking Ler, Riek’s headquarters.

          Riek’s protests at the government’s support for Paulino had no lasting effect. The intensification of oil exploitation in the Bentiu oilfields in 1998-9 brought with it, into the region, an increase of the SAF and other armed personnel, contributing directly to another outbreak of fighting between a profusion of Nuer factions beginning in April 1999.

          Faced with the demonstration of his powerlessness, Riek complained that while the 1997 peace agreement placed the oilfields under his control, the government’s support of Matip undermined his position and the entire ’agreement’.

          Privately he explained to his supporters both inside and outside the country, and to foreign observers, that he would stick to the latter of the agreement to show all concerned that when it collapsed, the fault was due to the government’s own bad faith.

          By the year 2000, Riek NO longer had access to government ammunition and supplies.. he was now without a movement. He tried to regain the initiative by leaving Khartoum in December 1999 and resigning from the government two months later. But lacking any real support in his home area he moved to Nairobi, where he tried to maintain the appearance of a leader of a viable political movement.

          The impact of the long-delayed reconciliation between Riek and Garang in January 2000 was muted by the fact, that Riek had very few troops to bring with him: he had alienated many of his former subordinates.

          Gatwech, you should THANK Dr. John Garang for permitting Riek Machar’s return.

          Where would Riek Machar be, had it not been for Dr. John Garang’s forgiveness and grace? Nowhere! And you all know it.

          reply

          • Khent,

            If you were to be a logical person the real question you should have asked in your last paragraph is: who would have championed the southerners right to self-determination if Dr. Riek Machar did not do it and convinced late John Garang to follow suit in 2002?

            I don’t need to respond to all your traditional inherited lies because that is what you are born to do. But learn what is called strategic politics of war and peace. You will find out that Dr. Riek Machar’s 1991 move pinned down the enemy on self-determination todate and dragged late Garang to accept it. Enjoy the strategic thinking of Dr. Machar. There is a saying that "the end justifies the means." Sorry you may not understand that. Welcome to the vision of self-determination!

            reply

            • Gatwech:

              It’s funny that you think you can distract us with anything other than the requested evidence.

              Your claims are based on wishful thinking. Militarily, Dr. John Garang was far more proficient in the execution of the Art of war.

              Dr. John Garang re-captured the vast majority of our territory, whilst Riek was "pinned down" by his reliance on the government for weapons, ammunition and supplies.

              The man worked for the enemy.. such treachery cannot be justified!

              This fact must be eating you alive, judging by the extreme nature of your disingenuous denial.

              Riek was powerless. Riek Machar has never been in any position to coerce Dr. John Garang on principles and objectives.

              Riek did NOT convince Dr. John Garang on anything.

              Your post is an example of the fallacy of question-begging.

              It’s when you use a rhetorical question, to make an assertion that you have no evidence for.

              This is simply a case of me asking you to present evidence instead of biased opinion, and you being unable to do so, because you don’t have any.

              It’s about time YOU started putting out the burden of proof, but then again that would be expecting too much of you, wouldn’t it?

              Since you obviously don’t understand burden of proof, allow me to explain.

              If the model in question were to read as follows: "Riek convinced Dr. John Garang".

              Then you are obliged to provide evidence regarding this assertion. If you cannot provide evidence, then you have no basis for asserting it. Those who do not assert it are under no obligation of proof or explanation whatsoever.

              The burden is on you to provide evidence.

              If you cannot meet this requirement, then all you’ve provided us with, is a view that you want to believe in, but do not actually understand and so cannot explain.

              That’s a fair assessment, no?

              You use the mantra "the end justifies the means", as though your position has been consistent. Far from it, it keeps changing in a manner likened to how a chameleon changes its color according to a given environment.

              At first you condemned, and rightly so.. Garang’s extensive Human rights abuses, and now you espouse that "the end justifies the means"? You really are a capricious hypocrite.

              Ps: I have no idea as to why you felt the need to humiliate yourself by attempting to insult my people with such unintelligible prattle, but I am amused by the sheer frenzied nature of your nakedly hateful response.

              No rebuttal is necessary....in fact I would like you to continue.

              Ascribing anything of consequence to a man, who only regained relevance by the virtue of Dr. John Garang’s grace, victory and forgiveness... is to disregard historical truths, for ahistorical fantasies.

              It would be a joke to relinquish the VICTORIES and achievements of the victor, to the vanquished!

              reply

              • Imaginery victories did not bring peace.

                Khent,

                You are such a naive person. It is clear that you rely on imaginery military victories of John Garang and claim that they brought the CPA. My friend, let me lecture you abit. The CPA was not brought by military victory but by international pressure especially from the US Bush administration. Without that pressure you wouild still be fighting the Jalaba in Torit town. Just ask yourself this simple question: where was the fighting during the signing of the CPA?

                Answer: it was still in Torit. Am I lying? The Jalaba was in control of Torit in the farthest South and you dreamt of Khartoum, let alone Juba? Can you imagine that the North-South war started in Torit in August 1955 and the CPA was signed in January 2005 when the SAF forces were still in control of Torit? The so-called Garang’s commanders were just hiding in Kakuma refugee camp near Torit. Where is your imaginery military victory. I couldn’t even talk of Juba, Malakal and Wau, the three known major regional towns in the South, non of them was captured by the SPLM/A. And yet you still talked of imaginery military victory.

                Let me tell you that if people were to talk of the real field commanders, Dr. Riek Machar was one of the best unlike John Garang who never shot a single bullet against Jalaba for his whole life. Dr. Machar fought many battles and his forces even wounded the current President of Republic Omar el Bashir over Mayom county in Unity state. What did Garang do practically? He was just a soldier by name. He never fought in Anya-nya I, nor Anya-nya II and even in SPLM/A. He commanded the war using remote control in hotels of Kampala, Addis Ababa and Nairobi.

                Riek Machar’s strategies whether by collaborating with the enemy, quarreling with the enemy, re-uniting with John Garang were all wise and successful strategies which have today brought you the self-determination you all sing about. Read the story of King David in the Bible in his relations with the mad King Soul as they were both fighting against Palestinians.

                reply

                • Gatwech:

                  Your on-going postings only prove that you really don’t want to learn anything.

                  What you want is to believe in something ridiculous.

                  In turn, this is why you can’t learn.

                  The United States was a factor, but one can only negotiate from a position of strength. In accordance with this military maxim... we were able to attain the CPA, by the virtue of our control of most of South Sudan.

                  All conflicts, regardless of the circumstances or context, follow the same script, be they personal, geo-political, or ideological.

                  You will -never- be a good debater as long as you lack objectivity due to fanatical bias, which leads to elementary mistakes and self contradictory claims.

                  Let me enlighten you.

                  In March 1989, government troops were uprooted and Torit was made the SPLA’s headquarters. The SPLA lost Torit in June 1992, as a consequence of the sordid split in 1991. The defending SPLA forces were outnumbered and outgunned by the huge invading force.

                  Let’s talk about Malakal, shall we:

                  Do you recall your fake military preparations for the capture of Malakal?

                  Do you remember when Riek decided to launch a face-saving action? There he carried out with outstanding incompetence and without calculating the end results of such a move.

                  Borrowing Dr. Nyaba’s words, Riek Machar had to bluff the people of South Sudan by pretending that he was mobilising the Nuer for the capture of Malakal from Jallaba Arabs.

                  The enemy benefited substantially from the split inside our movement. The government encouraged the split by sending false signals that it might let the South secede.

                  Once the split occurred, the government developed a four-prong strategy that encouraged Riek to fight the SPLA. It backed away from offering independence, mounted large scale offences against our forces and used the disintegration to facilitate its repression of the marginalized people of Sudan.

                  Independence was brought NO closer and inter-factional fighting increased, with devastating consequences for the civilian population.

                  By the end of 1995 Riek was the leader of a virtual movement, lacking any real substance or coherence.

                  Publicly he still hoped for external backing which could provide his ‘movement’ with some credibility, and early in 1996 he travelled to Ethiopia in an attempt to join the NDA.

                  His previous military collaboration with the government undermined his claim to head an anti-Khartoum, pro-independence Southern movement.

                  Riek failed in his bid and was ordered out of the country by the Ethiopian government.

                  By the year 2000, Riek NO longer had access to government ammunition and supplies... He was now without a movement. He tried to regain the initiative by leaving Khartoum in December 1999 and resigning from the government two months later.

                  But lacking any real support in his home area he moved to Nairobi, where he tried to maintain the appearance of a leader of a viable political movement.

                  Riek Machar was NOT a threat by 2002.. and Dr. John Garang did not need the traitor: Riek had NO army, no ammunition, No supplies-No movemnent. His return was entirely predicated on Dr. John Garang’s kindness and forgiveness.

                  The man had NO POWER to dictate a thing to Dr. John Garang.

                  The war has left the country with three armies- an army of cripples, an army of mourners, and an army of usurpers. You reside within the camp of the army of usurpers.

                  You take credit for a peace and its tenants, that you had nothing to with it.

                  You steal the legacies of others, because you are afraid of your own shadow, afraid that if you used a little common sense, you would have to admit that your inglorious collaboration with the enemy was wrong and unjustifiable!

                  reply

                  • Khent,

                    Stop twisting facts. Do you really know that if it was not because of Riek Machar, John Garang would have been completely removed by 1991?

                    1/ Dr. Riek stopped his forces in 1991 from capturing all John Garang’s positions in Equatoria where he was hiding in Torit.

                    2/ Most of the politicians and military officers including Kerubino Kwanyin, William Nyuon, Arok Thon Arok, Dhoal Acuil, John Luk, Dr. Richard K. Mulla, Professor Bari Wanji, etc joined Riek Machar. Garang was left with only Salva Kiir in the senior leadership.

                    3/ In 1997 Jallaba after Khartoum Peace Agreement wanted Riek Machar to have an all out war against Garang to capture all its areas. Riek refused and that resulted to the Jallaba refusing to give him any ammunition.

                    4/ Read the Rumbek meeting minutes, even the current SPLA chief of staff said by the time the CPA was signed, SPLA had no soldiers. Read those facts. The forces of the SPLA today are those from Paulino Matip Nhial.

                    YOu did not answer my question. When the CPA was signed, was Torit not still under Jalaba like it was in 1955 when the war started?

                    Garang was equally pressured by Americans to reunite with Riek Machar because he failed to fight the Jallaba. He was told to join the self-determination of Riek Machar.

                    So, please, don’t waste my time with your imaginery victories. If you are drinking somewhere, I am not drinking where I am. Just enjoy the self-determination vision you surrendered to.

                    reply

                • Gatwech! lie liel lie leil leiel.

                  Stupid like u (gatwech)can not admitted the truth. Mr Klent leave this inability guy alone. If a monkey can understand the evidences that Mr khlent provided. Thanks Mr klent.

                  reply

        • Gatwech, believe me or not, you have damaged Riek Machar beyond repair. You may one day come to realised that you are doing bad to the man rather than good when it is too late.

          Sudanese people; especially southerners have never accepted something given, they pick things or leaders for themselves. Garang was either picked by Kerbino or William Nyuon, Kiir Mayadit was picked by someone else, though the military system could have dictated that. This is why Southerners stood against Arabisation and Islamisation desspite having to pay a highest price for that. This is because Arabs and Muslims say to southerners "take these two things Arabisation and Islamisation" and they never accepted them. So, this is the same thing with you, southerners will never accept Machar as a result of you giving him to them, or telling them to accept him. Feel free to come up with your own analysis, but bear in mind that, you are making Riek pay a price for your views.

          When Machar succeed to rule the South should it happen please, do not make a party on a basis that you managed to successfully advertised him, make a party because southerners have picked him by themselves. And if he fails, do not blame yourself for that, look at what is Riek and not who is Riek, because eventually, Southerners, and only them will accept him as a program not as Riek Machar.

          Leaders of today are leading because of what they are, not who they are. Riek is an SPLM, he is a GOSS now and after 2010 and if he is not in yours or his opinion, he should resign from both SPLM and GOSS. There will be no "fails, or successes GOSS of Kiir without Machar nor innocent Machar without Kiir.

          You may chose to be annoyed by this observation, but someone closer to you, even amongst your love ones will tell you one day to leave Machar alone. The way you chosen to sell Machar has destressed to those who appreciated him for a couragious step he has taken by returning to SPLM, no such politician in the world has ever done that.

          Choose to disbelieve me Gatwech, if you reveal your true identity to Riek Machar today, he will get you behind bars in a second, because you are using him as a ladder for your own feet.

          Please, I beg you to leave Riek Machar for Southerners and his colleagues in the SPLM to reject or accept him, and I think he is already accepted that’s why he is in a leading position in both GOSS and SPLM.

          reply

          • Akol Liai,

            Read your foolish comments again. You talked of southerners choosing Riek Machar by themselves. Am I not a Southerner to talk of his good deeds? Don’t generalize southerners. The southerners know that it is your corrupt tribal leadership which is the one burning with jealousy about Riek Machar. Try an election against him if you will not fail badly. Your blackmailing comment will never work. Do you want me to allow you mad guys to criticise Riek Machar whenever he has done something good for your future? If you know the difference between a good and bad leader, why do you and your tribal colleagues insult Riek Machar whenever you see his name instead of appreciating him after doing good for you? And now you don’t expect me to defend his good work, ah! What a hypocrat!

            reply

            • I was not brought up in a culture of insult nor did I converted myself to such culture of violence, hatred and insults. This is the view that I have say, and you have right to insult as much as you can.

              But you need to I clearly I dentitfy yourself if you know you are doing a good job for Riek Machar. Let me tell you in frank, as I mentioned in my previous comment that you described me as foolish, Riek Machar will never ever win anything as a result of your work simply because that work you are doing is harming him.

              I am not a tribe, I am Akol Liai, ask for the owner of this name you will find me, butI am afraid if I ask for Gatwech I will never find who know you and this why you are trying to be play with Machar. I think you are not even who or where you described yourself.

              Please, you are a couragious man, come out from hiding and serve the country instead.

              I am sure if Riek know who you are, he will make you disappointed. If you continue insulting here and there on behave of Riek, and of course you will, because you don’t care about the consequences as Riek is the only one to pay a price of your deeds.

              Facts:

              1. Riek Machar will only be elected to run for chairmanship of the SPLM and GOSS by his colleagues in the SPLM, not his agents where ever they are including those in this website.

              2. If Riek Machar decide to run for those offices without the majority support in the SPLM, then that will be another split. I know you warned people on this website not long ago that "the new split will not be like that of 1991." Well it will not be like that, but you and I will not determine how it would be like, or what will happen, if you know you can determine then that you.

              3. Riek Machar has learnt a lot from his 91 split that he was pushed to by hatred intelligence Eng. Lam Akol for his smartness and tribalised agenda that he can make Nuer and Dinka fight to the finish, then his Lowa nation will rise as the majority in the South which he will then declare it a Lowa Kingdom and him as a first King. If you want to replace Lam Akol, I am afraid you may go different way just like Lam because Riek may not be ready to be misleaded by anyone other than his colleagues in the SPLM this time and in the future.

              Your insults may not change your world leave alone changing other people’s world.

              reply

              • Akol Aliai,

                Your comments do not make sense. Tell me how do I harm Riek Machar when I appreciate him for what he does good for you and me in the South? How do I harm him when I defend his good deeds from tribal attackers like yourself who do not judge leaders according to their possitive contribution but because of their tribes. People like you who live as prisoners of the past talking about 1991 instead of 2009 and the future.

                Then tell me what do you think about you people who support Salva Kiir, late Garang, etc on this website. Are you also harming them?

                Well, I never talked of any split. You are lying. Why would somebody split after his ideology and objective or vision has been accepted. We are for self-determination which caused the split. If it is accepted and the only vision southerners are singing about toward indepedence, then why the split. It is the unionist that I said should instead split if they wish. SPLM/A is not the old SPLM/A. It has become the new SPLM/A for self-determination. The separatists own it. Stop blackmailing me.

                reply

      • Door:

        Your argument is immaterial and irrelevant to this news reporting. It is an example of a non-sequitur argument.

        Non-sequitur arguments are a form of distraction in which you substitute off-point generalities in hopes of denying specifics by changing the subject.

        To my fellow Dinka brothers: incessant, childish and hypocritical articles against our blood brothers-the Nuer.. are beyond insufferable and can NO longer be tolerated!

        STOP posting such articles, especially when they are irrelevant to the news report.

        To criticise our political representatives is to ensure the accountability of our representatives- but such criticism should be comprehensive. It should NOT be directed towards one tribe, out of unmitigating hatred.

        Many of our most corrupt leaders are Dinka. Criticise them for humiliating and trivializing the legacy of our armed struggle for justice, equality and freedom!

        Criticise them for STEALING the wealth that a long-suffering people so desperately needed! Criticise them for neglecting our disabled war heroes, whilst they have been lavishly STEALING our children’s wealth for their mansions and offshore bank accounts!

        At the very least, criticise *them* for putting us into disrepute as a tribe! Their incompetence and corruption should NOT be shielded by notions of tribal kinship.

        Can you tell us when you can be expected to honour your implied commitment to criticise Dinka leaders for their corruption, incompetence, tribalism and kleptocracy?

        You are free to fluctuate your opinions as you like, and we are free to dismiss your fluctuations as irrelevant.

        reply

        • Khent,

          That is not how a Dinka i know talk. You must be a Nuer disguising as a Dinka. Well you are not worth answering either.

          reply

          • Lado:

            I’ll present you with a friendly advice, once again.

            Stop masquerading yourself as an Equotorian!

            It is dishonorable to feign an identity, in order to disparage an adversary. By not engaging your percieved threats directly, with your real identity, you show any neutral observer that you can only run scared.

            You pretend to be something you’re clearly not, and yet here you are, accusing me of being disingenuous.

            Interesting.

            The hypocrisy of your discourse is repugnant.

            reply

    • Mr Oduk, if your mind can not think enough why do you force it?.You have mentioned that it is the issue of New Sudan "vision" that killed two million lives in Sudan.You are wrong and tell your ass too.Why did your SPLM united failed acheived any meaningful agreement like the one of SPLM/A.Your SPLM/DC is now there because of SPLM/A.Where was it in 2003-2005? It it because it is just talking this is why you are talking and when war comes you will either run Malakal or Khartoum and start to Betrayed the Defenders of the South to Arabs.Shame on you

      reply

  • Hello Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba,

    Your comments are so baseless and prudents to help Southerners. Even though you priase government of south sudan hundred percent for their hard, nobody can make you to lead in south sudan because you are among those farcical leaders that confused the general public to mess up into those turbulent wars ongoing in the country.

    Many political parties can’t make democracy to let it exist in our country. I may think that, your party USSP need to be integrated into SPLM because other political parties in the south are backup by the oponent in north.

    Dr Akuma, Chiago USA

    reply

    • Dear Dr. Akumu, Chicago,USA.

      Thank you for your comments though they are rather more emotional than intellectual. And as to whether my writings are in fact baseless and could not help southerners remains your personal view. A view that I also on my side doubt its usefulness to any body let alone to southerners. But of course you have done well to express your views which you are entitled to.

      However let me make this very clear to you and whosoever shares your views. In the Sudan people dont write articles on the websites in order to ger jobs. You should have by now known how those crude, corrupt and incompetent guys were wrongly employed and how they are now mismanging the entire GoSS.

      I am not looking for alms from the GoSS in any form. Not even begging for employment. I can easily become self employed in South Sudan and with my Doctorate Degree in Obstetrics and Gynaecology and a registered Consultant at the Sudan Medical Council I don’t need to woo half educated people to offer me any employment, do you understand that.

      So keep your jobs for yourselves my friend, while your party big shots are busy looting the GoSS. One time in the name of Dura which is hardly visible , another time in the name of road construction and yet no road can be seen. Eat quickly and remember that your time is fast running out.

      About your naive suggestion of integrating the USSP into your corrupt and rotten political tool of intimidation, I hope you better declare it as the last of your dreams. Whether you are aware or not, your party in fact needs a complete overhauling, though I think that is not even going to be cost effect in any way.

      I challenge you my friend , your party is doomed to disintergration and it will never remain a single political body , come 2011. And if you were a keen observer you should have discerned the cleavage lines. They are just too obvious to miss .

      Let me give you a clue, OK. All you need to do is to study all the above comments in more details and you can seen the cracks eying you in the face

      When you said that other political parties in the South are being backed by either your party or other northern parties, it is simply so because this small parties in fact are motivated by quick financial gains and short cuts to power.

      For your information the SPLM and the NCP are dominant parties in the South, but they survive through looting of public funds and you cannt deny this. It is only pasrties like the UDF and the USSP that survive by good leadership and guinuine nationalism.

      Thank you for your offer of intergration. We are all ready playing politics and with much cleaner hands that your looters in the GoSS.

      Dr Justin Ambago Ramba, MD.

      reply

  • Khent,

    First of all, SPLA/M before it became SPLM/A after 1991 did not have a political forum where discontented leaders with the system could voice out their reservations. There was a need to split in order to form an examplery movement where issues could be discussed openly. Self-determination, democratic transformation and respect for human rights were at the center stage. But only semi-illiterate figures were placed by Garang in the top positions of the Politico-Military High Command and knew nothing about the issues.

    If you were to be a logical person the real question you should have asked in your last paragraph is: who would have championed the southerners right to self-determination if Dr. Riek Machar did not do it and convinced late John Garang to follow suit in 2002?

    I don’t need to respond to all your traditional inherited lies because that is what you are born to do. But learn what is called strategic politics of war and peace. You will find out that Dr. Riek Machar’s 1991 move pinned down the enemy on self-determination todate and dragged late Garang to accept it. Enjoy the strategic thinking of Dr. Machar. There is a saying that "the end justifies the means." The strategy has succeeded. Sorry you may not understand that. Welcome to the vision of self-determination!

    reply

    • Gatwech:

      Now look carefully and pretend for a moment that you are not abysmally intellectually challenged, but that you are actually capable of processing information like a normal human being, because I’m going to show you why.

      The disintegration of Nasir faction was precipitated by the desertions of its representatives and men, en masse.

      All cited serious shortcomings in the "movement" in their reasons for leaving: the concentration of power in the hands of Riek, the lack of democratic institutions, and the rising level of violence against civilians.

      It had been responsible for human rights abuses and had allowed the perpetrators of abuses to go unpunished. It had NOT introduced greater democracy in its own institutions, and had made little to NO progress in the creation of administrative institutions, beyond the appointment of a short-lived ’cabinet of ministers’.

      Before the Panyagore meeting, Joseph Oduho was embarrassing Nasir by his own objections to their authoritarian behaviour.

      In the end, a movement which proclaimed as its goals the achievement of greater democracy and the respect of human rights.. it failed miserably.

      The point is not necessarily to convince a person such as yourself, in denial, to see objective material presented, but for the understanding of the perceptive.

      You use the mantra "the end justifies the means", as though your position has been consistent. Far from it, it keeps changing in a manner likened to how a chameleon changes its color according to a given environment.

      At first you condemned, and rightly so.. Garang’s extensive Human rights abuses, and now you espouse that "the end justifies the means"? You really are a capricious hypocrite.

      If you would just take an elementary course in critical thinking, or debating, it would vastly improve your discourse.

      Instead you demonstrate the link between a lack of application of the rules of reason, and the resultant tendency to believe in the patently ridiculous.

      You now make it crystal clear that you are so utterly demented as to have no idea of what you are writing from one post to the next.

      It’s not a question of correcting you (again).

      It’s not even a question of you lying...again.

      It’s a question of you not being able to help it, because you’re mentally ill.

      And that is what you need to admit, at least to yourself.

      reply

    • Gatwech:

      It’s obvious that instead of actually disputing my posts you just sit there and whine about it like a silly child!

      To humour you, you were challenged to provide evidence and of course ignored the request, which is a useful method of demonstrating that a person knows what they are talking about.

      At that point your argument was dead.

      All you’ve done since is death-twitch like a chicken with its head cut off, spewing sour grapes from your decapitated gullet.

      Eventually you stop twitching, and finally even the bad smell will go away and you will simply be gone.

      reply

  • Khent,

    You are such a naive person. It is clear that you rely on imaginery military victories of John Garang and claim that they brought the CPA. My friend, let me lecture you abit. The CPA was not brought by military victory but by international pressure especially from the US Bush administration. Without that pressure you wouild still be fighting the Jalaba in Torit town. Just ask yourself this simple question: where was the fighting during the signing of the CPA?

    Answer: it was still in Torit. Am I lying? The Jalaba was in control of Torit in the farthest South and you dreamt of Khartoum, let alone Juba? Can you imagine that the North-South war started in Torit in August 1955 and the CPA was signed in January 2005 when the SAF forces were still in control of Torit? The so-called Garang’s commanders were just hiding in Kakuma refugee camp near Torit. Where is your imaginery military victory. I couldn’t even talk of Juba, Malakal and Wau, the three known major regional towns in the South, non of them was captured by the SPLM/A. And yet you still talked of imaginery military victory.

    Let me tell you that if people were to talk of the real field commanders, Dr. Riek Machar was one of the best unlike John Garang who never shot a single bullet against Jalaba for his whole life. Dr. Machar fought many battles and his forces even wounded the current President of Republic Omar el Bashir over Mayom county in Unity state. What did Garang do practically? He was just a soldier by name. He never fought in Anya-nya I, nor Anya-nya II and even in SPLM/A. He commanded the war using remote control in hotels of Kampala, Addis Ababa and Nairobi.

    Riek Machar’s strategies whether by collaborating with the enemy, quarreling with the enemy, re-uniting with John Garang were all wise and successful strategies which have today brought you the self-determination you all sing about. Read the story of King David in the Bible in his relations with the mad King Soul.

    reply

    • Khent,

      I have been waiting for your response to my above comment. Or have you called it a quit? Your imaginery victories are a child’s play. Riek Machar’s peace strategies saved you guys. Welcome to the vision of self-determination for independence.

      It is your arrogant imaginations that tempted John Garang to talk of unity with the Arabs when he could not even speak and write Arabic. He was just for the sake of it. His very poor Arabic could even make him the third class citizen in Khartoum. But it is typical of you people who could imagine an unrealistic thing just for the sake of it. Shame!

      reply

      • Gatwech,

        Please if you have ears and heart listen to a friendly advice from Akoi Liai Mager. Surely you have greatly damaged Dr Riek Machar’s dignity/image on this website. Your naive believe that you are selling him for the upcoming election is counterproductive.

        It is upto the southerners to choose Riek machar to be our next president or deny him the opporunity as per his history. Good thing will come from the other tribes not only Nuer.

        Please respect Riek machar character and he would win the election. Use your childish mind and he will reap the dire consequences.

        I have great respect for Akoi Liai mager for his mature-mindedness and you ought to do the same to save your dignity.

        reply

        • Your comments do not make sense. Tell me how do I harm Riek Machar when I appreciate him for what he does good for you and me in the South? How do I harm him when I defend his good deeds from tribal attackers like yourself who do not judge leaders according to their possitive contribution but because of their tribes. People like you who live as prisoners of the past talking about 1991 instead of 2009 and the future.

          Then tell me what do you think about you people who support Salva Kiir, late Garang, etc on this website. Are you also harming them?

          Well, I never talked of any split. You are lying. Why would somebody split after his ideology and objective or vision has been accepted. We are for self-determination which caused the split. If it is accepted and the only vision southerners are singing about toward indepedence, then why the split. It is the unionist that I said should instead split if they wish. SPLM/A is not the old SPLM/A. It has become the new SPLM/A for self-determination. The separatists own it. Stop blackmailing me.

          reply

      • Gatwech:

        I have no idea what your incoherence aims to address. And I doubt you do either at this point.

        I asked for evidence regarding your venom against Dr. John Garang.

        You didn’t answer - so am I to assume that you are your own source for your claims?

        If so, then present your evidence. Otherwise present your source.

        If you have no evidence and no source, then....

        You have yet to produce any quote, cite any scholar, or produce anything at all in support or your preposterous assertions.

        You have presented nothing.

        Must be lonely.

        If you can’t address evidence – if you have no evidence of your own to relate, maybe you should just admit that you don’t know what you’re talking about, and be done with it.

        That is the only point you communicate in this thread.

        Feel better now?

        Your biased assumptions come out of having the mind of an infant. You are clearly not intellectually mature enough to recognize or handle simple questions for clarity in an internet discussion board.

        Who told you that Dr. John Garang did not speak Arabic?

        Your hate-filled tribesmen?

        One has to think in order to know, and therefore transcend mere confusion.

        Parroting is not thinking, which is why it’s predictable that the most unthinking parrots end up being confused in spite of all their verbatim channelling of prior belief.

        A refuted hypothesis can only be sustained through evasive and paradoxical nonsense rhetoric.

        No one can explain anything to you, as your brain is defective.

        So I use you for comedy as a degenerate and intransigent child, and teach others instead.

        You should be happy to at least be useful, in spite of your limitations.

        reply

    • Gatwech:

      Your on-going postings only prove that you really don’t want to learn anything.

      What you want is to believe in something ridiculous.

      In turn, this is why you can’t learn.

      The United States was a factor, but one can only negotiate from a position of strength. In accordance with this military maxim... we were able to attain the CPA, by the virtue of our control of most of South Sudan.

      All conflicts, regardless of the circumstances or context, follow the same script, be they personal, geo-political, or ideological.

      You will -never- be a good debater as long as you lack objectivity due to fanatical bias, which leads to elementary mistakes and self contradictory claims.

      Let me enlighten you.

      In March 1989, government troops were uprooted and Torit was made the SPLA’s headquarters. The SPLA lost Torit in June 1992, as a consequence of the sordid split in 1991. The defending SPLA forces were outnumbered and outgunned by the huge invading force.

      Let’s talk about Malakal, shall we:

      Do you recall your fake military preparations for the capture of Malakal?

      Do you remember when Riek decided to launch a face-saving action? There he carried out with outstanding incompetence and without calculating the end results of such a move.

      Borrowing Dr. Nyaba’s words, Riek Machar had to bluff the people of South Sudan by pretending that he was mobilising the Nuer for the capture of Malakal from Jallaba Arabs.

      The enemy benefited substantially from the split inside our movement. The government encouraged the split by sending false signals that it might let the South secede.

      Once the split occurred, the government developed a four-prong strategy that encouraged Riek to fight the SPLA. It backed away from offering independence, mounted large scale offences against our forces and used the disintegration to facilitate its repression of the marginalized people of Sudan.

      Independence was brought NO closer and inter-factional fighting increased, with devastating consequences for the civilian population.

      By the end of 1995 Riek was the leader of a virtual movement, lacking any real substance or coherence.

      Publicly he still hoped for external backing which could provide his ‘movement’ with some credibility, and early in 1996 he travelled to Ethiopia in an attempt to join the NDA.

      His previous military collaboration with the government undermined his claim to head an anti-Khartoum, pro-independence Southern movement.

      Riek failed in his bid and was ordered out of the country by the Ethiopian government.

      By the year 2000, Riek NO longer had access to government ammunition and supplies... He was now without a movement. He tried to regain the initiative by leaving Khartoum in December 1999 and resigning from the government two months later.

      But lacking any real support in his home area he moved to Nairobi, where he tried to maintain the appearance of a leader of a viable political movement.

      Riek Machar was NOT a threat by 2002.. and Dr. John Garang did not need the traitor: Riek had NO army, no ammunition, No supplies-No movemnent. His return was entirely predicated on Dr. John Garang’s kindness and forgiveness.

      The man had NO POWER to dictate a thing to Dr. John Garang.

      The war has left the country with three armies- an army of cripples, an army of mourners, and an army of usurpers. You reside within the camp of the army of usurpers.

      You take credit for a peace and its tenants, that you had nothing to with it.

      You steal the legacies of others, because you are afraid of your own shadow, afraid that if you used a little common sense, you would have to admit that your inglorious collaboration with the enemy was wrong and unjustifiable!

      reply

      • Khent,

        Stop twisting facts. Do you really know that if it was not because of Riek Machar, John Garang would have been completely removed by 1991?

        1/ Dr. Riek stopped his forces in 1991 and told them not to go and capture all John Garang’s positions in Equatoria where he was hiding in Torit and newsite (Kapoeta).

        2/ Most of the politicians and military officers including Garang’s deputies such as Kerubino Kwanyin and William Nyuon plus Arok Thon Arok, Dhoal Acuil, John Luk, Dr. Richard K. Mulla, Professor Bari Wanji, etc joined Riek Machar. Garang was left with only Salva Kiir in the senior leadership. Is this not a fact?

        3/ In 1997, Jallaba, after Khartoum Peace Agreement wanted Riek Machar to have an all out war against Garang to capture all its areas. Riek refused and that resulted to the Jallaba refusing to give him any ammunition.

        4/ Read the minutes of Rumbek meeting on ’southsudannation.com’, even the current SPLA chief of staff said by the time the CPA was signed, SPLA had no soldiers. Read those facts. The forces of the SPLA today are those from Paulino Matip Nhial.

        YOu did not answer my question. When the CPA was signed, was Torit not still under Jalaba like it was in 1955 when the war started?

        Garang was equally pressured by Americans to reunite with Riek Machar because he failed to fight the Jallaba. He was told to join the self-determination of Riek Machar. Riek’s strategy has succeeded but that of Garang has failed. Riek knew what he was doing and that is pinning down the Jallaba to commit itself to self-determination as the resolution to the North-South conflict and then turning around to drag into the self-determination the reluctant John Garang. Both of these strategies worked. He pinned down Jallaba todate on self-determination and succeeded in dragging Garang to and Salva Kiir to sign self-determination as the first protocol of the CPA in 2002, just six months after their reunification. What a smart strategy! If you couldn’t understand it, then it is your problem of understand strategies.

        So, please, don’t waste my time with your imaginery victories. If you are drinking somewhere, I am not drinking where I am. Just enjoy the self-determination vision for independence of South Sudan you surrendered to in 2002.

        reply

        • Khent,

          The best thing you could say about Riek Machar during the split is that he became the victim of his conscience.

          Look at these facts below:

          1/ Dr. Riek Machar saw that there was intolerable need to guide the objective of the war for self-determination instead of the delusional new sudan vision by Garang who could not even speak or write in Arabic. How could he know the North better?

          2/ There was no democratic forum in the old SPLM/A to discuss the difficiency in the movement and therefore warranted the need to form another examplery movement.

          3/ Riek Machar did not want to fight against Garang’s forces. What he wanted was to find a way of killing two birds with one stone; and that is changing Garang to self-determination and making Jallaba to accept self-determination as the resolution to the North-South war. Can’t you see the situation?

          4/ Riek wanted peaceful means not military means with Jallaba. He then decided to form the movement for self-determination and asked the Jallaba to engage with him on the peace process.

          5/ Jallaba accepted the peace process but wanted him to fight Garang, which he did not like and at the same time pretended that he was collaborating with the Jalaba. Can’t you see the situation.

          6/ Riek succeeded in securing self-determination commitment from Jallaba by deceiving Jallaba that if it accepted his self-determination he would ally with them to force Garang to join peace.

          7/ Jallaba accepted self-determination as a precondition. Riek smartly exposed the self-determination agreement with Jallaba to international community so that the Jallaba would never run away from it in the future. He succeeded.

          8/ Riek tried to convince Garang to join the Khartoum peace Agreement. Garang refused. Jalllaba wanted Riek to fight Garang. Riek refused and frustrated the attacks. Jallaba knew Riek’s mind that he did not want to fight Garang and began to cause him problems with Paulino Matip and cut his ammunition support. Riek did not bother to look for weapons by giving false promises to Ethiopia. He wanted to use peaceful means as a tool.

          9/ Riek after knowing that he had pinned down the Jallaba on self-determination internally and internationally, he thought it was time to rejoin Garang and convince him to make peace. But that peace should be based on his self-determination.

          10/ Americans found out that Garang was weak without Riek and was following a vision which was not supported by his people. They know he could not achieve the regime change in Khartoum. They instead pressured him to join the peace process through self-determination. They threatened that they would cut their support to him if he did not comply. Garang knew he would not survive without the external support. He complied to do so. Riek on the other hand presented himself to the American as the champion of peace and self-determination and his strategy if followed would end the war.

          10/ Riek left Khartoum and joined with Garang. They both agreed that self-determination should be the basis of any peace talks with Khartoum. The CPA was signed with its first protocol on self-determination as the basis. Here is where we are now. What a smart strategy!

          reply

          • For god sake, you are right now a fully independant state.We are not independant because you rule us!We have no say in the south,while THE communist wing of the SPLA is obstructing the work of the parliment and the government in Khartoum.Why should we invest in the South, while you have proporationally more money than us.That your billions go to the pockets of few SPLA patriots is not our responsibility.

            Please stop hallucinating that northerners want to stop the secsetion of the South.YOU ARE RIGHT NOW A SEPARATE COUNTRY.WE ARE VERY HAPPY FOR YOU.

            reply

          • Gatwech:

            Riek did NOT CREATE Greater DEMOCRACY in Nasir:

            The disintegration of Nasir faction was precipitated by the desertions of its representatives and men, en masse.

            All cited serious shortcomings in the "movement" in their reasons for leaving: the concentration of power in the hands of Riek, the lack of democratic institutions, and the rising level of violence against civilians.

            It had been responsible for human rights abuses and had allowed the perpetrators of abuses to go unpunished. It had NOT introduced greater democracy in its own institutions, and had made little to NO progress in the creation of administrative institutions, beyond the appointment of a short-lived ’cabinet of ministers’.

            Before the Panyagore meeting, Joseph Oduho was embarrassing Nasir by his own objections to their authoritarian behaviour.

            In the end, a movement which proclaimed as its goals the achievement of greater democracy and the respect of human rights.. it failed miserably.

            You won’t provide the requested evidence regarding Dr. John Garang’s supposed inability to speak Arabic, because you can’t, because you don’t know what you’re talking about when you discuss Dr. John Garang’s capacities.

            Ad nauseum fallacy -> repeating claims as if repetition were proof.

            Why are you wasting your time, knowing that I refused to be duped into your circular arguments?

            You are simply attempting to foster a lie, by repetition.

            The Americans NEVER said that Dr. John Garang was weak, without Riek, the traitor.

            Your statements show the relationship between ignorance and dishonesty. The only way you can stay ignorant, is by being blatantly dishonest about what you cite.

            Evidently you don’t understand what misquoting is. When you attribute to someone a statement or claim that they in fact, never made, you are misquoting.

            You simply ignore what is said and convince yourself of things irrational.

            You should state your opinions directly and not try to hide them behind disingenuous reinterpretations of what others have said, OR NOT said in this case.

            Please either produce a quote of the Americans saying precisely that, or admit that NO such quote exists, and that you are distorting.

            If you have no evidence or source, then it’s fair to say that you seek to distort the views of others, because you’ve been forced to demonstrate that your own views are unsubstantiated and biased.

            Riek was NOT PRETENDING in his COLLABORATION with the enemy-he accompanied the enemy on military campaigns against the SPLA.

            The conflict between Paulino Matip and Riek was due to Paulino’s refusal to submit to Riek.

            The government to whom Riek and Paulino Matip served, fostered a devastating power play between the two men, resulting in the intensifying of insecurity in what was supposed to be a government-held area.

            Matip had maintained a somewhat autonomous military and economic base in his Bul Nuer territory near Bentiu. As a Major-General in the Sudanese army, he had direct access to military supplies.

            In reality, Riek had more need of Matip than Paulino of Riek, and Riek’s subsequent attempt to put his own man in the governorship of Western Upper Nile, resulted with Paulino’s troops taking and sacking Ler, Riek’s headquarters.

            Riek was powerless- Matip initiated military aggression against Riek, and your supposedly all powerful Riek could NOT hold a candle to Matip.

            You realise that your strategy is hopeless, but attempt the equally laughable ruse of denying Riek’s extensive military involvement in campaigns against the SPLA.

            What you are trying to imply through dishonest babblement is that Riek did not work in military concert with the SAF against the SPLA.

            Riek was fooled- He’s NOT the great Strategist you make him out to be. Khartoum backed away from offering independence, after realising that he COULD NOT enforce his agreement with them.

            reply

        • Gatwech:

          To request on a discussion forum that others -Stop posting facts - is like having a conversation in which you expect to talk without having to listen - in which you present ’propaganda’ without having your assertions questioned.

          Riek was NEVER in a position in threatening Dr. John Garang in 1991.

          If you would simply stop repeating lies fed to you, we can conclude this increasingly pointless discourse.

          You’re using it as a crutch to compensate for incoherence, and adding selective heresay parrotings to your posts in the process.

          You realise that your strategy is hopeless, but attempt the equally laughable ruse of denying Riek’s extensive military involvement in campaigns against the SPLA.

          What you are trying to imply through dishonest babblement is that Riek did not work in military concert with the SAF against the SPLA.

          You so resent this, that you will do or say anyting in hopes of distracting from it.

          This is the point where you pretend to ignore facts and assert fantasy. But off course, pretending to ignore reality doesn’t make it go away.

          Why do you continue your disingenuous argument?

          Regarding the current makeup of the SPLA:

          Nothing you wrote above lends support to your conjecture.

          The only one who can’t accept this is you.

          Please provide evidence for your assertions regarding the manpower of the SPLA.

          Personally I don’t think you can. Even if you were not a self-righteous tribal-minded individual and a liar.

          But I offer you here a fair challenge and an opportunity to prove me wrong.

          All your replies are failures. The premise is just plain stupid. Only stupidity keeps your posts going.

          This boils down to the fact that you have nothing whatsoever to present that will defend your position, so good luck with denying, diverting, and accusing, as it will only last for so long when confronted with a constant demand for actual proof.

          At any rate, please post *direct quotes* of whatever you are refering to so I can determine which is the case [fib, confusion, or both].

          The sadness lies in the realisation of how much EFFORT and perverted wasted intellect, YOU must expend to achieve and maintain such ghastly ignorance.

          I’ll repeat myself for your case:

          The SPLA lost Torit in June 1992, as a consequence of the sordid split in 1991. The defending SPLA forces were outnumbered and outgunned by the huge invading force.

          Had YOU read my post before putting your foot in your mouth, you would know that I already have addressed your question.

          Read again care-fully, next time.

          You were busy with your mindless ranting to have not noticed my earlier postings on this. But hey, I can always repost it, and hence falsifying your poor excuse of an argument.

          I’ll make this clear:

          You don’t have to beat around the bush; if you are reading-challenged, simply say so. I’ll dumb it down for you, and see if that works...

          Note- I continue to answer your questions, though you decline to answer mine.

          This does not go unnoticed - it is an admission of defeat on your part, for all to see.

          Regarding the supposed role of the Americans:

          Why would the Americans supposedly have to convince Dr. John Garang on enshrining Self-Determination in any prospective agreement in 2002.. when he had already guaranteed Self-Determination in 1994?

          I sense a slow and obstinent wit, that cannot grasp the chronology of history and events.

          With what army did Riek have that he could possibly "drag" Dr. John Garang to anything?

          Your posts are interesting examples of how you lie -to yourself- in order to sustain your delusions.

          You’re the only drunk, there are no such fools here, other than yourself.

          You are not a challenge, and you bore me.

          reply

          • Khent,

            I am sorry for you, brother. Your argument is like the dialogue of the deaf. You keep telling me to present facts which I have already presented. I have tried even to put them in numerical order such as point number 1, 2, 3, etc, yet you have never understood it.

            I even referred you to documents such as the Rumbek meeting of 2004. I also referred you to the statement by the current SPLA Chief of Staff during the meeting where he said the SPLA had no soldiers in 2004.

            You still believe in your imaginery military victories to resolve every thing. When I said drag John Garang to accept self-determination did not mean using military, but rather using power of the brain to convince him to see the reality of the situation. You just jumped to assume that it was military mean.

            Good enough that you acknowledged Torit being under SAF from 1955 until 2005 despite your imaginery victories. Good enough that you acknowledged Garang surrendering to self-determination in 1994. This was after 1991 correctional move by Riek Machar.

            To me, Garang accepted democratic transformation in Chukudum Convention in 1994, three years after 1991 move on the issue, but finally surrendered to self-determination officially in 2002.

            An arrogant person like you who thinks writing is a drama will not listen. Don’t insist that I produce quotes when you yourself have not quoted from people or leaders. It is a known fact that Garang and Beshir were both put on pressure to sign peace after Garang had his pressure put on him to join Riek on self-determination. I know it is bitter for you to admit it. But that is a fact.

            Just save us your dialogue of the deaf and tell me frankly where are we now after all these arguments? Which vision is more viable now despite how it was pursued; self-determination or united new socialist/secular Sudan? Which one is backed by the majority of the people of South Sudan? Please simply admit that you have all surrendered to the wise vision of self-determination and that Riek Machar’s strategy has brought you peace and inevitable freedom and independence of the South.

            reply

            • Gatwech:

              You were asked to produce quotes, in which Dr. John Garang was apparently convinced by Riek.

              You continue to fail to do so.

              You have spent all your life lying and misinforming yourself, consequently you now find it difficult to distinguish fact from fiction.

              This is what has become you.

              This thread isn’t just about politics, it is about your pitiful failure to produce anything noteworthy by way of evidence for you eccentric claims.

              You’re attempting to shift the burden of proof away from yourself and onto others.

              ’Hopefully’ lost in the fog is the fact that -all the while-you have presented NO proof whatsoever for your outrageous claims.

              Provide EVIDENCE of statements of the SPLA chief of staff.

              You have failed to prove your claims with direct quotes.

              This is no trivial matter, and shall be seriously dealt with, as in any other case of deceitfulness.

              There is simply no proof for your claims. It is enough to distract the weak minded, but nothing more than that.

              Your posts do not entail evidence of any kind. It is special pleading> An appeal to emotions when facts are not in supply.

              Dr. John Garang was pressured to sign a peace agreement with the North- he was NOT told to join the then politicaly & militarily irrelevant Riek by 2002.

              By 1999 Riek was inconsequential and irrelevant. Face it!

              Your bias cannot accept this fact, can it?

              He did NOT provide us with peace. His forces did NOTHING! Our forces were the only obstacle to the north..we negotiated and signed the peace agreement- Riek had NO army-Matip was a guard-dog for the north.

              reply

              • Gatwech:

                You won’t provide the requested evidence regarding Dr. John Garang’s supposed inability to speak Arabic, because you can’t, because you don’t know what you’re talking about when you discuss Dr. John Garang’s capacities.

                Ad nauseum fallacy -> repeating claims as if repetition were proof.

                Why are you wasting your time, knowing that I refused to be duped into your circular arguments?

                You are simply attempting to foster a lie, by repetition.

                The Americans NEVER said that Dr. John Garang was weak, without Riek, the traitor.

                Your statements show the relationship between ignorance and dishonesty. The only way you can stay ignorant, is by being blatantly dishonest about what you cite.

                Evidently you don’t understand what misquoting is. When you attribute to someone a statement or claim that they in fact, never made, you are misquoting.

                You simply ignore what is said and convince yourself of things irrational.

                You should state your opinions directly and not try to hide them behind disingenuous reinterpretations of what others have said, OR NOT said in this case.

                Please either produce a quote of the Americans saying precisely that, or admit that NO such quote exists, and that you are distorting.

                If you have no evidence or source, then it’s fair to say that you seek to distort the views of others, because you’ve been forced to demonstrate that your own views are unsubstantiated and biased.

                reply

                • "SNAKE EXPOSES ADULTEROUS MAN IN BENTIU".

                  A MAN caught committing adultery, was forced out of his hiding place by a snake. Gatkuoth, a resident of Bentiu, had been in bed with Gatwech Diews wife. When Gatwech came home, Gatkuoth hid in the childrens bedroom. When he saw a snake approaching him, he jumped out and found Gatwech in the living room. Gatwech arrested him, tie him up and call the police. He was taken to court fined 6 cows and $500 pound after admitted.

                  reply

                  • Khent,

                    I will just ignore your dialogue of the deaf for now. I guess you don’t want to read the documents such as the Rumbek meeting of 2004 I referred you to to get the quotes or statement you want about the SPLA Chief of Staff,James Hoth Mai, etc. You can access it on the website of ’southsudannnation.com’ I know your type will never admit your failure and surrender to the self-determination vision. You are burning inside with jealousy. This is why you also failed to answer my questions in the last paragrap. Sorry, you are too deformed to be reformed! Good luck and continue to believe in your delusions.

                    reply

                    • Gatwech:

                      Very well then, since you admit to being defeated per the topic at hand, I will deal with the rest of your "argument".

                      I did NOT refuse to analyze your elusive evidence. You are required to provide the link along with the quotations.

                      This is your obligation, not mine. The onus is entirely on you.

                      I’ve asked you politely, and several times to provide the link and the quotes, but, because you cannot succeed in debate, you are determined to mystify this discourse.

                      Merely referring to a document whilst failing to provide it, is exceedingly inadequate.

                      What’s worse, even when given a chance to redeem yourself, by proving the documentative quotes along with the link, and commenting intelligently on it, you are afraid to even try?

                      You have NOT provided the requested EVIDENCE.

                      Therefore isn’t it fair for us to conclude that you don’t have EVIDENCE?

                      Prove that you have actually read my post (can you read at all?) and show that you grasp it and so defend your comments with regards to it.

                      Get into the habit of confronting pieces of material and requests made of you, instead of cowering before them; only THEN, can you be in a position to judge whether I have answers or not.

                      Do not respond with more whining if you cannot provide things required of you.

                      I am NOT at all "jealous". After all, my camp negotiated and signed the CPA.

                      The accusation has no meaning coming from you other than as an indication of neurotic megalomania.

                      It’s not much fun ’debating’ you because your brain is broken. You seek an audience of passive minded saps, who will absorb your propaganda like sponges, and move on.

                      Which is the basic neurosis that drives your hollow rhetoric.

                      reply

  • Khent,

    You will always try to dodge the facts I have been presenting to you comment after comment. But you have surely failed and proven illogic. How come you don’t want to visit the ‘southsudannation.com’ website? Go and open the archive page, you will read the document entitled: “ CONFIDENTIAL REPORT ON THE Joint meeting of the SPLM/A leadership Council, General Military Command Council, Heads of Commissions, SPLM Secretariats, SPLM County Secretaries, Civil Society & Community Leaders.” This was produced in Rumbek in November 2004.

    You will see how Garang was exposed. Lack of organization,lack of direction, failure of chain of command, corruption, nepotism, etc, etc. were all his characteristics. All the things that led to the split of 1991 were echoed by the participants in the meeting. The leaders from all those institutions spoke out at last.

    Here below are some of the statements by some of the leaders. Read them and go to the full document to get more statements. You will read the confession by Gen. James Hoth Mai that there were no forces for SPLA. Khent this is why in the SPLA forces today, 55% of the whole forces are from Nuer. Most of them from Paulino Matip’s forces in addition to those that rejoined with Dr. Riek Machar and those that were with James Hoth Mai, etc. All have now made up the 55%.

    Please enjoy reading how Garang was exposed in that meeting which was fortunately mediated by Dr. Riek Machar. Read it also from the full text on ’southsudannation.com’.

    CDr. Malik Agar: The current issue of the differences between the Chairman and his deputy is surprising in that I was aware of this even ten years ago. Whenever it is about to be addressed, each of them says there is ‘no problem’. The big problem is trust among yourselves. This needs to be rebuilt and you will be the ones to arrive at sound solutions to the existing problems.

    Comrade Chairman, as we enter the new era, we shall be competing with other parties. Let us start with the effective establishment of our structures and draw up our programmes. We need a system. I have worked as a Governor for ten (10) years; yet, I could have committed many mistakes during that time. Has the Chairman any day called me to tell me that I have made a mistake? There is no system here.

    The issue of reorganizing the army is a burning issue as most of the soldiers are now in an unorganized form and this will work against us. As monitors will verify, we don’t have the army. The distribution of powers is the vital issue to avoid future misunderstandings.

    Cdr. James Wani Igga: I congratulate the Chairman for calling this important meeting. I also congratulate Cdr. Salva for having attended this meeting. This paves a way for a solution to our problems. I thank both of you for your patriotic stand since the beginning of the struggle – both of you have collectively worked to protect this movement from upheavals. I consider you as the central pillars of this Movement. Let me come to the main topics, which are the SPLM/A’s major problems. Solving a problem is like bringing pus out from somebody’s gull. Problem No. 1, we are not working as a team, which results in disgruntlement.

    No. 2, we have the structures formed in the 1994 Convention which were only the NEC & NLC, but by 1998, people became fed up of those structures. I appeal that we keep these structures but make necessary changes. I would like to underline something connected with structure. In 1998 we came out with a constitution named the SPLM constitution. This was not passed by the NLC because they were expecting a state constitution. But we had agreed to use that constitution, and there are structures there. In one of the L.C. meetings we had revised the constitution and even the manifesto. Up to now, we had passed four (4) documents. The SPLM constitution. The SPLM manifesto. The 3rd document is the SPLM policy on dialogue and it concerns how we go about South-South dialogue. Our main constraint in starting South-South dialogue is the lack of money. Documents No. 4, is the SPLM policy on the transformation of Sudan. All these documents are there ready. Comrade Chairman, our constraint i! n the political Affairs Commission is lack of facilities, but we have really tried our best. As for the army reorganization, if we become surprised by the signing of the peace deal, I think it will be difficult to regroup our army simply because we don’t have resources. Once peace is signed, there is going to be the establishment of standard national structures. Structures are our No. 2 problems, including the official management of office institutions.

    Cdr. Wani listed other problems: No. 3: The existence of a Kitchen Cabinet is deplorable and creates doubts and mistrust.

    No. 4: The geographical imbalances found in the movement. If this is not addressed, we will never be in harmony. No. 5: Poor chain of command. No. 6: Spread of rumours.

    Let’s come to the question of rumours. When rumours were developing I was in Nairobi and I went to Kampala. When I reached Kaya, I was being asked what had happened. I was then told that you are coming from Nairobi and that you met and decided to replace Cdr. Salva with Cdr. Nhial. I told that that this is just rumours and I believe that Cdr. Salva will not believe this. He will immediately throw it out the window.

    Problem 7: Lack of implementation of resolutions and the lack of a follow up body. Our resolutions always die on the paper. Problem 8: Corruption which remains rampant in the Movement. Corruption must be fought for example, some years back the Chairman in a meeting informed us that Cdr. Deng Alor brought some money from Nigeria, but how that money was spent had never been explained to us again. I ask the question where is the transparency and accountability we talked about?

    Problem 9: Lack of cooperation, accompanied by sabotage. Some work for the downfall of others without any accountability.

    Problem 10: Neglect of the army and its welfare. Problem 11: Absence of job description, which cause confusion. Problem 12: Nepotism. It should be fought.

    There are two examples to illustrate the issue of nepotism. One is the removal of Aleu Anyeny from his position and his replacement by the Chairman with an officer from his home village. Another is the appointment of Dr. Lual Deng as an advisor to the Chairman. We all heard this in a meeting in which the Chairman announced Lual’s appointment without any official procedures followed. When I talk about regional imbalances, all I need to say is that no Equatorian was even allowed to be a signatory of the six protocols. We are making history and this history should involve all the people of New Sudan. The protocols are only signed by individuals from Bahr el Ghazal, Upper Nile, Nuba Mountains and Funj!

    Problem 13: Neglect in the chain of command, which has led to indiscipline.

    Cdr. James Hoth Mai: I greet the gathering. When the movement started you were seven (7) and now you are only two (2) – five died having problems with you (Dr. John). Why do you have problems with your colleagues? The leadership has disabled the movement, so why keep it? Why is there a GMC, because it has never met until now? There is no SPLA ready to fight, and for me there is no army to order. If I am ordered to arrest Cdr. Salva, I do not have an army to arrest anyone. Even the Chief of Staff cannot order me to do anything because there is no army. There is no chance to meet the C-in-C – it will take long time to meet him. This is not good, therefore a committee must be formed now to sort everything out.

    Cdr. Oboto Mamur: Greetings. The Chairman always had problems with his colleagues. Now you are two (2) and you are turning against yourselves. Chairman you have been lying throughout since 1983. A Chairman should trust his deputies because there is a big problem here. I ask the Chairman whether he has mandated us to judge him? And if so, we will pass our judgment on him now. We don’t want to talk for the sake of talking. There must be a committee to follow up on all the resolutions agreed on here. And I add, the convention will not solve our problems.

    KHENT, HAVING READ MY FACTS ABOVE, I WILL BE WAITING FOR YOUR QUOTES SUPPORTING YOUR ALLEGATIONS AGAINST DR. RIEK MACHAR.

    reply

    • The Nuer have NOT eclipsed the original component of the SPLA! STOP distorting.

      You use statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... For support rather than illumination.

      The assumption that an idea, once imagined, must exist as a physical reality, simply because it is imagined, is also form of ad nauseum fallacy.

      My line of questioning and dissecting has more to do with the work and mental effort required to read and understand a post, as opposed to flame-bait noisemaking on the internet, or making silly percentages to promote a tribal fantasy.

      Nasir was NOT an exemplary ’movement’!

      The disintegration of Nasir faction was precipitated by the desertions of its representatives and men, en masse.

      All cited serious shortcomings in the "movement" in their reasons for leaving: the concentration of power in the hands of Riek, the lack of democratic institutions, and the rising level of violence against civilians.

      It had been responsible for human rights abuses and had allowed the perpetrators of abuses to go unpunished. It had NOT introduced greater democracy in its own institutions, and had made little to NO progress in the creation of administrative institutions, beyond the appointment of a short-lived ’cabinet of ministers’.

      Before the Panyagore meeting, Joseph Oduho was embarrassing Nasir by his own objections to their authoritarian behaviour.

      In the end, a movement which proclaimed as its goals the achievement of greater democracy and the respect of human rights.. it failed miserably.

      Whatever the cosmetic or purely theoretical aspects of SPLA administration, it can be contrasted with Nasir, where there were NO similar civil administrative structures, and where much of what was announced in the form of internal organization existed on paper only.

      reply

Copyright © 2003-2010 SudanTribune - All rights reserved.