"Should Biar develop some tact and finesse in his activism? Yes! Finesse and nuanced articulations are public relations necessities Biar must learn because focusing on Kiir’s personal failings creates distractions that move us away from important issues Biar discusses internationally and regionally."
Yes, I know, some of the things Dr. Biar Ajak
said during his appearance on Nairobi-based KTN News are not part of the activism many of us
would recommend. Discussing President Kiir's public inebriation sounded like a
conversation between two friends on the weekend over nyama choma and
some beers at the comfort of their home.
The Kenyan journalist sounded like a gossip not a
journalist (Well, I don't know what being a "journalist" means these
days! But that's beside the point!).
Biar may have let the excitement of the moment
carry him away. We must note, however, that Biar is always on point when it
comes to the failures of the government in Juba even if we may not agree with
how he articulates his positions.
He is an activist not an opposition politician so
his occasional overzealousness should be excused. We may perhaps suggest using
filters when it comes to media appearances because "journalists"
these days prioritize a good narrative over facts.
It is difficult to know these days what is an opinion
and what is a journalistic “this is what happened!” Even Journalists in world-class
television programs and newspapers editorialize what should be a mere
description of the old time, “what happened!”
But there is a bright side to Biar's schadenfreude.
This may sound silly, but this is a wake-up call
for those around the president. Why does a man who is not even seventy walk
like a hundred-year-old? Why does the president occasionally appear inebriated
without his aides or advisors realizing that such unsavory appearances do not
do justice to president's moral and political standing in South Sudan and in
the region?
I'm looking at the bright side of what Biar said
for its practical importance. If you don't want Biar to say what he said then
don't make the president appear the way he appeared in public.
Are there people around the president who enjoy
seeing the president inebriated and sickly? If the answer is "no"
then why does this happened time and again?
Those who care about Kiir Mayardit should now, I
suggest, ensure that the president is protected from unsavory public displays.
I've always said that President Kiir is being let
down by those around him. The president is allowed to step out while looking
either sickly or inebriated.
Biar and the KTN journalist may have been somewhat informal
and tactless, but they discussed a FACT we can no longer ignore. Let's ensure
that the president does not appear drunk in public instead of berating those pointing
out that apparent fact. Biar wasn’t telling us what is merely inside Biar’s
mind; it’s something we can all see.
If the president's advisors cannot protect him,
then I think it's time for Kiir's children to protect their FATHER. Kiir's
advisors make him sound and look like a fool. How is that support? How is that
care? How is that respect? How is that patriotism?
In South[ern] Sudan first government website,
President Kiir was described in his profile as a teetotaler. I thought
it was strange that they needed to mention that on a government website. That
they thought it was necessary to mention that on the government website raised
a red flag for me because most of us know that President Kiir is not a teetotaller.
While I, like many of you, don't agree with Biar's
schadenfreude at the expense of President Kiir, I think we need to redirect our
attention and anger at Kiir's advisors because Biar is only an observer who is stating a fact with which we are all familiar.
Should Biar develop some tact and finesse in his
activism? Yes! Finesse and nuanced
articulations are public relations necessities Biar must learn because focusing on Kiir’s personal
failings creates distractions that move us away from important issues Biar
discusses internationally and regionally.
We must talk about possible solutions for inter-ethnic
killings, deadly floods, hunger, economic stagnation, political incompetence,
corruption, political intimidation, gender-based violence, child-marriage, bad schools,
bad roads, bad hospitals, bad leadership…You get the point.
As South Sudanese, we need to prioritize solutions
rather than dwelling on problems with which most of us are familiar. Dwelling
on problems without solutions is the reason why SPLM leaders failed South
Sudanese.
______________
* Kuir ë Garang is
the editor of The Philosophical Refugee.
"R-ARCISS has become a problem that needs a solution. South Sudanese have wasted a lot of time finding solutions to solutions instead of finding solutions to national problems."
Since
South Sudanese warring parties signed the agreement for the resolution of
conflict in South Sudan (ARCISS) in the August of 2015 and then “revitalized”
it in 2018 (R-ARCISS), nothing has worked in the way agreements are supposed to
work. Instead of acting as the blueprint for peace and stability in the country,
the agreement has turned out to be the problem itself.
How
can a problem be a solution to another problem?
However,
the main signatories to the agreement, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement
in Government (SPLM-IG) and the Sudan people’s Liberation Movement in
Opposition (SPLM-IO), still believe the implementation of R-ARCISS is the
magical solution to the South Sudanese political crisis. They know their attitude toward
themselves and the political impasse they have experienced since the agreement was
first signed in 2015. But they wish this attitude away.
Unfortunately,
the parties still believe that this attitude will magically disappear, and the
agreement will be implemented in “letter and spirit” as Dr. Riek Machar likes
to say.
When
Riek Machar decided to withdraw
the participation of SPLM-IO from the
security mechanisms meeting on March 24, 2022, President Kiir deployed security
forces around Riek Machar’s place of residence. When Riek protested the
deployment of the forces because he was not consulted about the supposed
protection, President Kiir justified his action as his attempt to protect
Riek Machar.
This
begs the question: Protecting from whom? Are there rogue forces under President
Kiir he cannot control? This dynamic raises more troubling questions than
answers.
But
this, undoubtedly, shows the extent to which President Kiir and Dr. Riek Machar
do not trust one another. Kiir expects Riek to flee Juba at the slightest
provocation and Riek knows Kiir’s recalcitrance.
Obviously,
President Kiir was conscious of what happened in December of 2013 when some
senior SPLM members refused to attend the second day of the National Liberation
Council on December 15, the night on which the crisis began. Riek fled Juba
that night.
Riek
also fled Juba in July of 2016 when the implementation of the August 2015
agreement reached a deadlock, eventually leading to a bloody armed
confrontation.
What
one may conclude from the nature of the relationship between Vice President
Riek Machar and President Salva Kiir is their inability to find solution
without external support.
It
is now clear that R-ARCISS is no longer the path to peace and stability in
South Sudan. It’s an obstacle.
Accordingly,
Kiir and Riek need to think beyond R-ARCISS and find a home-grown solution to
the problem.
The
implementation of agreements is difficult, so I have no illusion for any simplistic
solutions. Nonetheless, thinking in a formulaic way in a country with a complex
history, politics and ethnic relations is a dangerous state of mind. But the
complexity in implementing R-ARCISS is not an inherent complexity; it is its elite-centredness
and the egoistic nature of agreement leaders that has created the costly
impasse.
What
South Sudan and South Sudanese need is a path to peace and stability. There is
no divine pronouncement that the only path to peace and stability is R-ARCISS.
Being
a leader requires being creative in the name of the country and her peoples.
What is happening in South Sudan now between SPLM-IO and SPLM-IG is this
obsession with the elite-centered R-ARCISS as the only way to peace and
stability.
This
vacuous idea that all clauses of the agreement must be implemented before peace
partners embark on national development is the reason why South Sudanese will
continue to suffer as R-ARCISS stands in the way of peace and stability.
It's
scary that President Kiir and Vice President Riek Machar are not able to think
beyond R-ARCISS. How long will regional leaders and international partners be
consulted to help solve issues of leadership and governance in South Sudan?
It’s
time for President Kiir and Vice President Riek Machar to realize that they can
forget their egos in the interest of South Sudanese. As long as external
mediators are needed to reconcile South Sudanese and move the agreement
implementation forward, South Sudan will continue to remain unstable.
It's
nearly seven years since the agreement was first signed. That’s three years
short of a decade. Politically, that should tell South Sudanese everything they
need to know about Kiir’s and Riek’s intention regarding civilians and the
country. A formal agreement will never bring peace and stability to South
Sudan.
It’s
time to prioritize what civilians want. It’s time for Dr. Riek and President
Kiir to realize that two decades have been wasted through a petty yet a costly rivalry.
There
is hunger and flood everywhere in South Sudan. There are ethnic conflicts in
Eastern Equatoria, in Western Equatoria, in Lakes State, in Warrap State, in Jonglei
State, in Unity State….
It’s
time to rethink South Sudanese political future and the path to peace and
stability. South Sudanese civilian have been in a state of destitution for over
fifty years and Kiir and Riek have added another fifty years of suffering and destitution.
It’s
time to move past R-ARCISS and think as South Sudanese who must solve their
internal problems as brothers and sisters. If Riek and Kiir cannot work
together, or they are unable to find solutions beyond R-ARCISS, then it’s time
for them to acknowledge that they are liberation and historical leaders, and that
time is now ripe for development leaders.
R-ARCISS
has become a problem that needs a solution. South Sudanese have wasted a lot of
time finding solutions to solutions instead of finding solutions to national problems.
*Kuir ë Garang is the editor of The Philosophical Refugee.'
