Shame on political leaders and elders of Twï, Bor, Nyarweng and Hol


photo: Time.com
This article is highly polemical so be ready for what it’ll drop your way. It is the first in a series of articles critical of all parties involved in Jonglei’s security fiasco.
So, we supposedly have a comfortingly functional government in Juba because we have semblance of governance: structural allocation of ministries and presence of presidency. However, the government is so simple that understanding it becomes complex. It’s so functionally simplistic that one needs to sit back to study its complexity. I’m sorry if you didn’t get that!
In unnerving instances, Ministers and Members of Parliament are answerable to the president and the president is answerable to NO ONE. The constituents or electoral blocs are nobodies. Well, perhaps the president is answerable to European’s supernatural being called god, his stolen, rude son, Jesus Christ, and the timid lady who broke the basic rules of biology, the Virgin Mary.
Basically, in a word, this government is advisedly a no-go place if one wants to help the average South Sudanese. With no doubt, anyone who believes this government is going to build schools, better equipped clinics, better roads and improve security… is insane. Clearly insane!
What government in the world would allow civilians to be butchered for hours without sending in security forces? What president in the world would treat the massacre of 79 (using his figures in the press release) innocent civilians in their villages with demonic indifference?
In a world of sane personalities, the least a conscientious president would do is to stop all the functions and visit the wounded and the victims; to comfort them and to show them that their president is actually the president of ALL peoples not some people.
I’d assume South Sudan is not too young for this, or is it?
Just tell me, how can the presidency, the government, and the national assembly go on with business as usual as if nothing has happened?
Beshir inconveniences South Sudan everywhere he goes. He comes to Juba and people’s lives come to a standstill. He goes back to Khartoum and he sends bombers to bomb innocent civilians. Yet our president showers him with shameless praises like a fat kid praising a mother with a cookie in hand.
Yeah, the pot-bellied ministers will take this on face value and say: “This is how politics and diplomacy works.” Shame! Great shame!
However, I shouldn’t blame the problems in Bor, Twï and Duk counties exclusively on Juba. If the leaders in these counties know the above state of affairs to be valid— the ineffectiveness of Juba government —then how the hell do the leaders in the above four communities expect service provision from such a dysfunctional government run by self-absorbed oligarchs?
If Twï leaders and politicians don’t take their people’s lives seriously then why would others be serious about civilian lives in those areas?
These three counties have ample numbers of educated citizens and can strategize on a multi-layered approach to security in their counties. Why aren’t they doing this?
As a matter of fact, the citizens of these counties have resources both at home and abroad but I fail to understand why we don’t we have any single leader who can conscientiously mobilize these resources to build infrastructure that can enable development and improve security in these counties.
You shamelessly crowd in Juba hotels while your people die in record numbers. It’s even painful to know that none of you voiced any strong condemnation of the atrocities, the indifference and inaction of the government. Why exactly are you alive? Why such cowardice?
Instead of you convening a nationally televised polemical meeting to lash at the government, you are nursing your bitterness in your rooms because you are afraid of the president. You let your people down because of your cowardice, lack of organization and leadership.
It should be clear by now that the leadership in Juba is ready to let your people die. In fact, you’re helping the government kill your own people through negligence. Shame on you!
To give you just a sample of the gross neglect and indifference: Wernyol (August 2009, over 47 dead; Jalle (December 2011, 45 dead); Duk (January 2012, 86 dead; December 2012, 7 dead); Maar (August 2013, 7 dead; October 2013, 78 dead). And this is just a sample of the attacks and deaths in these three counties of Bor, Duk and Twï.
If you don’t know how to strategize then ask for help! If your education is only on paper then ask for help! If you are afraid of the president then drop dead!
I’m not mincing words here because I’m sick of you and your forced indifference, your cowardly existence and useless education and leadership.
Whoever thinks these attackers are Murle tribesmen needs to go back to class and learn. The attackers are armed, lawless militants with a cleansing agenda. The classical Murle interest is the cattle not people’s lives. Typical Murle tribesmen only kill those people who go after the cattle.
When young children are being killed with their families in their villages, then you gotta wonder what has removed human emotions from our leaders locally and nationally.
My suggestions are these:

• Stop this nonsensical formation called ‘Greater Bor Community’ because it’s meaningless and anachronistic. It also frustrates any developmental initiatives as this artificial, nominal community doesn’t have headquarters and we don’t know where its development initiatives would be based.
We should form or strengthen powerful, knowledgeable and effective leaders and independent leaderships in the three counties. Twï County, Duk County and Bor County leaderships should then cooperate on issues of mutual interest and to exchange valuable resources and skills as far as security and development are concerned.
The above three communities have developed a bond that will always be there…and should be celebrated into posterity. A common name is counterproductive, unnecessary and frustrates development initiatives.

• Each county should coordinate pooling of resources both abroad and at home because we have resources. We just don’t have effective leadership that can efficaciously help in administering these resources to maximize their benefits.

• Start lobbying for decentralization of security services and other government services. States should be allowed to train its police force and the headquarters centered in places that have increased insecurity. Each county should therefore lobby for the presence of police force in vulnerable areas.

• Start living among your own people in order to feel what they experience. Living in Juba makes you divorced from the realities your peoples’ experience. It can also force you to improve security because your lives would be at stake. You fought during the war, why are you now afraid to die with your people?

• Stop being afraid of president Kiir. He’s your president, not some killer demon or a deranged old fellow. He knows the truth. Speak up on behalf of your people. Get fired in the name of standing up for your community and you’ll be honorable; get hated because you want your people to live in peace. You have an influential voting bloc that you can use against the president. You can influence other communities to abandon such a president if he doesn’t take care of South Sudan citizens equally.

• Learn how to be strategists if you aren’t one now. No one is going to solve these issues for us. The problem in Jonglei State can’t be solved using a single approach. We need a multi-layered approach which involves improving infrastructure in the area.

We need good roads and means to contain the flood. The area between Ajah-ageer and Akobo needs to be turned into commercial farms or habitable area. If the government doesn’t have money then it should be contracted out to developed countries that are willing and can do that and use it for 10 to 20 years before handing it to us.
Re-establish and strengthen tribal chain of accountability (see my book, South Sudan ideologically, for a comprehensive look at Tribal Accountability Model (TAM) and other models of accountability.
In the end, it’s about being organized, being courageous, being critical thinkers (outside the box) and being people who care about their own people reg ardless of the consequences.
Put your people first and your sorry bulging stomachs second. You have brought great shame to your communities and it’s high time you help.Kiir’s sycophants like our dear uncles, Makuei Lueth and Kuol Manyang, should be left alone for they don’t care about their own Bor County people, leave alone South Sudanese or Jonglei state citizens.

They can however be welcome by Bor County citizens if they are ready to contribute to the development and peace in the county.

To Twï, Bor and Duk counties leaders and elders, the government has abandoned your people and it’s up to you to help the government continue to kill them through your cowardice or go home and strategize on ways to help the young ones smile again.
If you have any humanity or dignity left in you, then do something that would endure! I know your kids are safe, but your people back home are in abject destitution.


Abyei, You'll Come Back Home


Abyei, You’ll Come Back Home

 

Déjà vu! Nothing but broken bones and broken promises
Bad, grotesque and impious men in dangerous disguises

 ***

Years ago you were misled into pretentious consolation
For years you’ve yearned without confrontation
Coming home has become torturous and intergenerational
You’ve cried rivers but solution expected national
You’ve hemorrhaged plenty but the world is indifferent
Big men have intervened only to fall back in severance
We watched your homelessness with awful anger
Blackness, charred huts, dead youngsters… dreadful answer
But what has become of consciousness carers?
What has become of your leaders, who’ve become starers?
Late Nyankol asked relevant questions only to go unanswered
You’ve done much for yourself to be free and pampered
But no, your freedom has become bigger than your very being
Promises of 1972 are over and again being seen
You ask yourself what you’ve done to deserve this
And we ask ourselves how the sleepy leadership persists
The greedy old fellows sold you and passed
But like a strong, sleepy lioness, you won’t be suppressed
With white turban and gown comes the impious schemer
With blue suit and tie comes your leader, the clueless dreamer
With tears, blood, death, hunger, wretchedness you remain
We’ve seen the fat, pot-bellied dreamer in the main
You’ve been sacrificed as the turban and the tie bargain
You’ve been abandoned but the dreamers complain
Little to nothing is promised as 2005 promises are now 1972
You’ve taken it with grace and you’ll pull through
Wipe your tears for you need your strength and will
Document your sorrows for you’ll need them still
The world saw the smoke of your burning villages
It saw you burn down, watching emotionlessly like savages
Something reminiscent of the savage slave masters
It’s difficult to know who’s to blame in all quarters
But one thing we all know: your innocence shines
And in the thick of it all we are ashamed and you’ll be fine
All you’re asking for is to go home and be free
It isn’t too much to ask but it’s now at an exorbitant fee
Abyei, you’ll come back home!
Funny and sad because you’re home but not home
You’re near but you’re still far
In the end, you’ll be a free star!
Abyei, You’ll come back home!

(c) Kuirthiy 

Functionalization of Criticism

I've always maintained that critics are actually the friends of any government because they present the leadership with a mirror through which leaders can check their performance and public approval or disapproval.

In South Sudan, and other countries where repression and intolerance is the order of the day, critics are seen as the problem; the vilifiers.

Instead of capitalizing on critics, South Sudanese leadership tends to see critics as their enemies. The actual enemies of South Sudan are those who don't correct the errors. Those who see the leadership going astray and condone the act are the enemy number ONE of South Sudan.

What leaders need to do is to study what critics say or write and negate it by deeds that can be deemed helpful to South Sudan. A good deed is never criticized and that's what we tend to forget.

Let's functionalize criticism for our own benefit.

MY ENCOUNTER WITH A CURIOUS OLD 'WHITE' MAN


I sat down in the library this morning waiting for a client after having hooked up the computer into the power outlet. I then put the files on the table. Sitting beside me was an old 'white' man. Strangely enough, he kept on looking at me stealthily. This being Canada, I brushed away his curiosity as this curiosity happens a lot.

After having seen that I'm comfortably seated with my computer on, he walked up to me and asked without qualm.
"Are you hacking?"

Yeah, just like that. I looked at him curiously and retorted back: "Why would I do that?"
He confidently looked at me and said: "Some people have been hacking into people's computers here. I thought you were doing that."

I was a little upset so I looked at him with a frown and said: "No, I'm not hacking?"
He stood there looking at me and then  said as he walked way: "I'm surprised you're behind time. I thought you knew what hacking means."

Very much controlled, I looked at him and said: "I know what hacking means but I just don't know why I'd hack into people's computers."

He then  silently walked a way. I heard him talk to someone in the children's section of the library but I couldn't see who he was talking to.  After talking to that person for sometimes, he walked back toward the area I was sitting in. He was sitting next to me. As he neared, I turned to him and said: "You have to be careful who you ask such types of questions."
He looked curiously at me and said self-righteously: "I don't know why someone would be upset when I'm just asking a question."

"Someone might assume you're accusing them and that can count as character assassination," I said.

The old man was confident. He shook his head and said. "I wasn't accusing you. It'd be an accusation if I'd  pointed at you and asked "Why are you hacking?"

"I work with people from different parts of the world and what I've come to realize is that different cultures respond to the same question differently so you have to be careful how you approach people. I don't care about the question you asked, but some people might not take it well," I said.

"Why can't we just discuss issues like civilized people."
"I'm just cautioning you because you might find people who might perceive your question differently," I told him.

He thought I was being irrational and defensive and at the same time, wrong! He couldn't understand how his question could possibly be offensive to anyone. He assumed that as long as what he was saying was right, there's no reason for people to be upset.

I realized his understanding of civilization was limited so I didn't press him on that. He went on to say that even if he'd annoy someone by the question, which he considered right and innocent, he wasn't doing anything wrong. He assumed that whether his question annoyed me or anyone, it'd still remain within the law and truthfulness.

I also realized then that the old man had a certain perception of me so I decided to give him a dose of me. I told him that any questions anyone asks have motivations behind them. Before you asked that question, I said, you had to look around and perceptually rationalized who could be a possible hacker around here.

Nairobi Westgate Mall Shooting and the Deaths of Innocent Civilians

 
Many people were cautious regarding the identity and nationalities of the shooters when the shooting happen. Kenyans officials refused to speculate as to the nationalities of the gunmen. However, we all knew who they could be. Given what happened in Kampala in July 2010, we all knew the fingers would point at the Somali Islamists, Al-Shabaab.

What one has to ask is why do such people become so wicked to that extent? What happens to their human hearts? These young people have siblings, parents and relatives however, they are willing to takes lives without compunction.

Only dehumanized hearts would do such a horrible act. No person in his/her right mind would work into a mall packed with shopping families and start shooting. The radicalization of young Muslim men in the west is something that has to be addressed properly. The mainstream western populations point fingers at the radical groups, however, we have to understand that these young men are handed to or forced to seek supposed 'purpose,' sense of self and human validation among the heartless radicals.

These young people live at the periphery of the society and that makes them easy targets of radical groups among whom they find a sense of belonging. The consequences of marginalization of these young people become the horror and a problem to the innocent civilians.

Racism vs. racism

Definitions:

  1. racism:   pride in one's race
  2. Racism: negative instrumentalization of pride in one's race.

I reconstruct the definition of 'Racism' in my book, Is 'Black' Really Beautiful? because I've seen how it's been misappropriated in our contemporary usage. Racism now means what the speaking or the person in question wants it to mean. A person who's discontent with the action of someone who's not of his/her Race will always cite Racism as the mitigating factor even when she/he can't prove their interaction constitutes an act of Racism.

Racism is defined by some people as the attitude of  the Powerful White Men. Others define Racism as the perception that one's Race is more superior to that of others. Yet others believe strongly that Racism is just simply 'White Supremacy.'

Given the definitions we have in the above paragraph, it seems to me Racism is basically a definition which is a function of the unpalatable interaction between A &; B; all belonging to different Races.

To me, Racism is the attitude that one's Race is better than other Races. And this attitude doesn't have to be implicit or verbalized. It can be verbalized or internalized until it's spoken out. However, I don't have any problem with anyone saying that his/her Race is better than mine.

I don't have any problem with that sentiment because that's simply human nature. It's a feeling. I don't have any problem with that attitude of 'superiority' because I know it's not true that his Race is better than mine. In other words, Racism in itself is not the problem; that is, the attitude that one's Race is better than other Races is okay. It's healthy for whoever is speaking or claiming that state of affairs. Remember that state of affairs is fallacious though.

Pause: Pride in one's Race is basically racism; but a benign, necessary one.

However, Racism, becomes bad, grotesque, if other factors are used to instrumentalize it into dangerous parameters.

racism + Hatred = Racism (Bad)
racism +Hatred + wealth =  Racism (Dangerous)
racism + spite + power = Racism (disenfranchisement and dangerous)
racism + jealousy = bad

In the end, it's not racism (that one's race is superior) that is bad, but how that sentiment is used instrumentalized to affect to others.

See Is 'Black' Really Beautiful? on www.thenilepress.com

Follow me on Twitter: @kuirthiy

Can We Just Talk, Damn It!

 The saddest thing about minority groups in North America is the self-centeredness with which they see things. At the same time, they’d want to see issues in the way the mainstream society perceives and defines them. When these issues don’t work in the way they see them, they start to complain. 
And the mainstream (so-called) expects the minority groups to embrace their new home in terms the host country dictates. ‘We welcome what you bring but to a comfortable extent.’ Sound right, but hey, but careful!

We stick to our guns and flaunt our cultures and values ostentatiously without compromise yet we want to coexist. Sounds like stubbornness to me!
I’ve heard somewhere that doing something in the same manner over and over again and expecting a different result is madness. Yeah, this is sad. There has to be an appropriate way in which things should be defined to effect change; change discussed and acceptable to all!

Change is a sad and scary word to a strongly established system. Change only comes when the party that instituted the tenets of the society believes the change it for its benefit. However, the mainstream, as we always like to call it in North America, shouldn’t be expected to embrace change instantly. They have to get convinced that this is not only good change, but change that benefits everyone. And fortunately or unfortunately, the greater benefit has to go to the host if that change has to be effected. Sounds sad, but pragmatic and true!
Expecting others to just accept or believe what we want in the name of ‘we are human’ and ‘this is the 21st century’ isn’t only naïve, but also counter-productive to any forging of co-existence.

Pushing issues ahead blindly because we feel they are the ‘right’ thing to do should be put to the test.  The recent debate in Quebec about religious symbols in public workplaces doesn’t need castigation or unhelpful criticism. What is right is for both parties to amicably sit and discuss these issues…thoroughly. Well, that sounds utopian because we’re dealing with a party resisting change!
The mainstream Quebec society shouldn’t expect minorities who flaunt their religious symbols in almost all sectors of the society to just let go of them just because they’ve come to Canada. A Sikh, who uses a turban will have to stop applying for government jobs or remove it (turban). Yeah, I know this sounds exclusionary.

Well, minorities shouldn’t just expect the mainstream Quebec society to accept what they bring culturally just because ‘this is our human right.’ Even ‘good things’ need to be understood!
 As long as we stick to the same platitude of ‘oh this is discrimination!’ without explaining how any change is beneficial for, or destructive to, all parties to understand, we shouldn’t be upset or surprised when our world view is either challenged or rejected.

Why I’m not enthused by the election of Mark Carney...yet

Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney, waving at supporters after his election victory . Photo: Financial Times Mark Carney is a protest cand...