It’s Time for A Nonviolent Revolution in South Sudan

South Sudan has arrived at a point where SOMETHING HAS TO HAPPEN. But what that something shouldn’t be, is VIOLENT. Changing governments through violence has never bred any peaceful, inclusive and democratic governance. Violent removal of leaders leaves behind bottled-up bitterness, which usually results in another violent removal. But we all agree that the government in Juba is not only a failure, but also a destructive, myopic force for any peaceful coexistence of South Sudanese.

While I believe South Sudanese leaders have committed unspeakable and horrendous atrocities, I don’t necessarily see them as bad people. They are just horrible quasi-politicians, who failed to transition from a militarized tradition to a purely, democratized political system. Additionally, I don’t see them necessarily, contrary to how Alex de Waal’s perceives them, as people who maliciously went out of their way to consciously design a destructive system. Disorganized and jittery of Khartoum’s attitude toward the South, and lacking creative leadership capacities, South Sudanese leaders got lost in the complexities of state-building.

SPLM leaders had no ideological base and creative internal avenues to solve their problems. Lack of leadership, tribalized politics and the general desire to be powerful and wealthy, destroyed South Sudanese leaders. Instead of focusing on solving their internal political problems, they resorted to building their tribo-military bases to defend themselves against their imagined and real politico-military enemies. This helped create a system in which what politicians and military leaders did was to compete in a survivalist system. It was about survival. And in a survivalist system, what you need are people you can trust and people who support you no matter what. Sadly, in South Sudan, these people turn out to be one’s fellow tribesmen.

Since these leaders have tribalized the military and politics in a survivalist system, it’ll be almost impossible for them to be the ones to make South Sudan a peaceful environment. They have to be forced out as they’ll not leave on their own accord. Nonviolent defiance is the only way to force these leaders to change.

In 2008, it had to take the intervention of elder statesmen like Joseph Lagu and Abel Alier to avert the crisis. In march of 2013, these leaders failed to compromise their differences so they postponed the problem. In December of 2013, instead of resolving their differences, they resorted to public ridiculing of themselves. There was no reason why these leaders couldn’t reconcile their differences. Problem-solving is what leadership is about.  What John Garang did in Rumbek in 2004 could have been a superb example. Sometimes the leader has to eat a humble pie to avert a crisis.

December 15 crisis was a result of lack of internal mechanism within SPLM to solve problems. This is the problem that continues to break South Sudan apart, and will continue to do so.

But once given a golden opportunity through the Agreement for the Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan (ARCISS) in 2015, they shamefully squandered the only chance for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in July of 2016. Greed, incompetence and lack of strategic vision continues to plague South Sudanese leadership.

In the light of this, it’s time for South Sudanese from all works of life and from all tribes in all towns and villages in South Sudan to should ‘ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.’ The war has to end! But the war will NEVER end as long as SPLM is in charge. The current leaders need to be forced out. However, they can’t be forced out violently. They need to be forced out peacefully.

Students, women, youth, wounded veterans, civil servants, shopkeepers, religious leaders, police, prison wardens, need to occupy government offices and Dr. John Garang's mausoleum until Juba accept to bring peace. Villages and towns should refuse to fight for any rebel groups. SPLM forces should refuse to fight for leaders who don’t care about anyone; those who have brought the country to its knees. It’s time for the war to stop; but it’ll not stop as long as we continue to support these leaders. We praise these leaders when they brought the very conditions that  are now killing civilians.

In 12 years, all that SPLM and SPLA have brought South Sudanese is misery. SPLM is too deformed to be reformed, to use John Garang’s words.

It’s time for Juba to be led by fresh and younger eyes. SPLA and SPLM have done their jobs. It’s time for the names of the mighty two to be archived as someone once suggested. President Kiir and senior military leaders need to be replaced by younger, nontribal military leaders. You can tell me “good luck with that!” but that’s the necessary reality: they have to go!

There’s nothing left for SPLM leaders to bring to South Sudanese accept destruction, misery and destitution. The people of South Sudan are more powerful than a few politicians. Take your country back! It’s time for a South Sudanese revolution!

Twitter: @kuirthiy.

Email: kuirthiy@yahoo.com

The Sudd Institute and Anger Paroxysm

Let’s use education to inform our people not to belittle them. Let’s use education for the benefit of our people not for our personal gratification. While it’s natural for a human being to take pride in a given achievement, and to emotionally take issue with some unbecoming behaviors, it’s necessary for us to remember the purpose of education in a larger context.

The few highly educated South Sudanese should be role models, who should go above and beyond the simple fancies of “I am better than you!” It’s very easy for one’s good work to be overshadowed by anger paroxysm.

For many of us, The Sudd Institute and other scholarly institutions like Ebony Centre, are doing a valuable job even if no visible results come from their efforts. I have been a keen reader of some of their works. While some of their writings are clinically enterprised to avoid antagonizing the leadership in Juba, and to hide their individual tribo-political biases, most of their writings are scholarly and helpful. My exchange with Nhial Tiitmamer in relation to ‘International Trusteeship Agreement’, is an example of how important The Sudd Institute can be in terms of encouraging healthy debates.

However, what saddens me when it comes to some of The Sudd Institute’s scholars like Dr. Jok Madut Jok is how acrimonious and abusive they can become when criticized. Jok, for example, could go as far as calling his interlocutors ‘stupid’ and ‘clowns.’ A scholar of Jok’s caliber, should know that he’s a public figure and many young people look up to him. This requires that his emotional state should be carried in a manner that’s above and beyond that of the average person.

Note that I am not saying that Dr. Jok needs to be saintly when interacting with South Sudanese; however, it’s advisable that Dr. Jok, being the face of The Sudd Institute, one of the leading research institutions in South Sudan, should faithfully control his temper. What’s the point of losing one’s mind if one has all the facts to refute the claims of one’s accusers? Being a public figure demands extreme self-control, even self-denial.

Admittedly, Dr. Jok has done more than any South Sudanese politician in terms of development, supporting literacy and governance in South Sudan. He helped build a school  and found a research institution beside his other renowned scholarly works.

What bothers me is why Dr. Jok can’t simply disagree with his debaters without calling some of them names. If The Sudd Institute is being baselessly accused by some people as being complicit in Jiëëng dominance of the government, then Jok, as a renowned scholarly, can easily use his resources to prove these people wrong.

South Sudanese, essentially, aren’t used to debating political ideas without resorting to name calling and intimidation so I was hopeful that The Sudd Institute could contribute toward the mitigation of this attitude like Nhial and I did. But if the leading scholar of the institute, who’s supposed to help in alleviating this malady, falls prey to this problem then someone like me is left hopeless.

Dr. Jok has proven himself beyond any reason doubt that he’s not only a formidable scholar, but also a practically helpful man. This is why I’m calling on him and all The Sudd’s scholar to set an example of patience and perseverance.

We can debate without calling people names. We can debate without flaunting our education on people’s faces. Some of the people opposing your writings or views might have misunderstood some things about you. Correct them instead of insulting them.

You set up a research institution to help correct or inform some of our sociopolitical ills. Don’t lose sight of that. Rise above vindictive paroxysms! I know this is hard given the nature of our tribo-political realities; but this is what’s required of you when you become a public figure.

When one of The Sudd’s scholar speaks at an international conference, it’s South Sudan that’s represented. When one of The Sudd’s scholar presents a paper in an academic conference, a young person would look at such a scholar and aspire to be just like that. Don’t short-change yourself emotionally. Scholars need to have their ideas and works trashed. They then defense their works as civilly as possible.

~ Kuir ë Garang