Position Paper of the “Nuer Community in Government” to the IGAD Peace Talks
14 min readThe Position Paper of the Nuer Community in Government on IGAD’s Key Provision and Justification for the Agreement and the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan
Introduction:
July 7, 2015 (SSB) —- We the Nuer Commissioners of Counties in the three states of Greater Upper Nile Region are profoundly concerned about the recent IGAD’s peace proposal on the resolution of the conflict in South Sudan. The proposed agreement asserts that “The state Council of Ministers in the states of Jonglei, Unity, and Upper Nile shall be reconstituted and appointed at the beginning of the transitional, and not later than a month, as per the following power-sharing ratios: GRSS: thirty-three (33) per cent; SPLM/A-IO: fifty-three(53) per cent; SPLM Leaders (Former Detainees): seven (7) per cent; Other Political Parties: seven (7)per cent”.
The rationale of IGAD in proposing that the SPLM/A-IO should be awarded 53 per cent of the state Council of Ministers in the three states of Upper Nile Region is yet to be explained by the mediators whether it was based on military realities on the ground or on false assumption that the SPLM/A-IO represents the Nuer ethnic group despite the presence of a big number of Nuer on the side of the Government of the Republic of South Sudan.
It is also difficult to fathom how the IGAD can award a percentage of power-sharing to SPLM- Former Detainees and other parties in the three states of Greater Upper Nile Region without a proper investigation to ascertain which party has a presence and support in the three states.
The only party that is known to have Members of Parliament in Upper Nile state is SPLM-DC which constitutes 25% of representation in Upper Nile State Legislature. The SPLM-DC, although it doesn’t have Members of Parliament in Unity and Jonglei states, does have party’s offices and staffs, whose presence can be verified even before December, 15, 2013. How would the SPLM-DC that has 25% of legislative power as a result of the 2010 election in Upper Nile state accept the IGAD’s peace proposal that reduces its power-sharing to less than 2%? It seems that the IGAD’s peace proposal lost touch with the realities on the ground in South Sudan because SPLM-DC cannot accept such an arrangement.
As the Commissioners administering Counties that have the biggest population of grassroots, we are obliged to reject the IGAD’s peace proposal because it is not anchored on realities on the ground but on false assumptions that will not usher in peace in the country. Looking at the proposal critically, it is very easy to conclude that the current military situation in the country is preferable to IGAD’s proposed peace which would only perpetuate anarchy.
This critique of IGAD’s peace proposal is divided into four parts. Part One dwells on the ethnic composition of Greater Upper Nile region in relation to the IGAD’s peace proposal. Part Two touches on the reality that the three states of Greater Upper Nile Region are governed by the Nuer. Part Three reveals the dominance of Nuer among the SPLA forces that fight the rebels in the three states of Upper Nile Region. Part Four is the Conclusion.
Part One: The ethnic composition of Greater Upper Nile Region
The IGAD’s peace proposal on power-sharing in the Greater Upper Nile Region seems to be contrary to ethnic composition of the region. Although it is true that Nuer ethnic group could make up over 55% of the population of the region, there is no scientific justification for IGAD to conclude that all the Nuer are on the side of the rebels in order to justify allocating 53% of power to the SPLM/A-in Opposition.
It is true beyond a reasonable doubt that out of 55% of the Nuer population of the region, at least 45% are in the territory controlled by the Government. The Nuer in the refugee camps, if we consider them as supporters of the rebels, could not make up 7% of Nuer population of the Greater Upper Nile Region.
Since we have now proven that the population of Nuer who support the SPLM/A-in Opposition in the Greater Upper Nile Region could be only 15% of the entire Nuer population, then, where did the IGAD get the rationale to allocate 53% of power-sharing to the rebels?
To prove that IGAD is out of touch with the ethnic composition of the region, we should remind the IGAD that Greater Upper Nile Region is composed of nine ethnic groups such as Nuer, Dinka, Shilluks, Anyuak, Kumo, Maban, Kachipo, Murle and Jie. Based on the National Census of 2008 before the independence of South Sudan, the other ethnic groups make up 45% of the population of the region while the Nuer make up 55% of the population.
The eight ethnic groups of the Upper Nile Region do not support the rebellion of SPLM/A-in opposition as it can be demonstrated by the rebels’ fighting forces on the ground. The Dinka, Murle, Anyuaks, Kumo, Maban, Kachipo and Jie have no foot soldiers fighting on the side of the SPLM/A-in opposition. This is a glaring fact that IGAD can easily discern without magnifying glasses. The individuals on the side of the SPLM/A-in opposition such as Mabior Garang de Mabior do not have Dinka fighters from Greater Bor community fighting alongside the Nuer rebels.
The only tribe in Greater Upper Nile Region that has few forces fighting alongside the Nuer rebels is Shilluk because Maj. Gen. Johnson Olony rebelled in May. Despite the fact that Olony joined the rebellion of Riek Machar, the Shilluk population that support him is only 8% of the entire Shilluk ethnic population. Most of the support of Johnson Olony among the Shilluk comes from Panyikang County. The rest of the Shilluk in other Counties are on the side of the Government.
Based on the support the SPLM/A-in opposition has in the region, there is no logic whatsoever for IGAD to allocate 53% of power to the rebels whose support among non-Nuer is limited to individual support. If such a proposal were to be imposed, the repercussions would be worse than the status quo because of the reasons below.
First of all, the Nuer on the side of the Government will resist the implementation of such a proposal through fighting. For instance, the Nuer controlling Unity State cannot relinquish the state power and hand 53% of power to the rebels that they defeated without bloodshed. Within internal Nuer politics, the IGAD’s peace proposal is a recipe for another war which is worse than the status quo. Therefore, resisting the rebellion of Riek Machar would be far better than implementing the IGAD’s peace proposal which basically means the continuation of the uncontrollable anarchy which is worse than the disease the IGAD wants to cure.
Second, the Dinka, the Shilluks on the side of the Government, the Murle, the Anyuaks, Kumo, Jie, Maban and Kachipo will not accept the power of the three states to be handed over to the SPLM/A-in opposition without a fight. The SPLM/A-in opposition is responsible for the heinous crimes and ethnic cleansing which took place in 2014 in Bor, Bentiu, Baliet, etc. It would be unimaginable that the same ethnic groups that were massacred by the White Army allied to the SPLM/A-in opposition would actually accept the rule of the rebels without a fight.
The consequence of the IGAD’s peace proposal, if implemented, is to compel the other ethnic groups of Greater Upper Nile Region to separate and fight for separate administrations. This will lead the Dinka to form their own state, the Shilluk their own and the rest of minorities will follow suit because it is unfathomable that the same rebels that massacred them in 2014 would become their rulers. Once the Greater Upper Region explodes into ethnic wars and Bantustans, is that what the IGAD called “peace”?
It is now clear beyond a reasonable doubt that the IGAD’s peace proposal is actually a scheme to dismantle South Sudan into ethnic Bantustans because once the Greater Upper Nile Region is carved into ethnic enclaves, then, the rest of minorities in Greater Bhar-el-Ghazal and Greater Equatoria would imitate the same political virus. The people of South Sudan may wonder whether IGAD is a consulting firm of SPLM/A-in opposition because their proposal is akin to the rebels’ proposal of twenty one states in which the country is divided into 21 tribal and clan administrative units.
The IGAD’s peace proposal would mean that each ethnic group will have to demand their own state because they would not accept to be ruled by Nuer rebels. If looked at critically, the IGAD’s peace proposal will not only destabilize Greater Upper Nile Region but also other regions. Therefore, the peace proposal will strip off the National Government from controlling and ruling its own citizens.
Part two: The Upper Nile Region is ruled by the Nuer
Prior to the conflict of December, 15, 2013, the three states of Greater Upper Nile Region were ruled by the Nuer Governors one among them was democratically elected in 2010 election. After the conflict, the three Nuer Governors and their Nuer followers defended the Government from the Nuer rebels of Riek Machar.
It could be argued that the attempted coup of December, 2013 is an extension of Nuer internal rivalry into national politics. One of the immediate causes of the coup was the removal of Taban Deng Gai as the Governor of Unity state and his replacement with Dr. Joseph Nguen Montuil Wejang.
Traditionally, the political elites of Dok, Jikany, Jagei and Nyuong have held a position that somebody from Bul cannot govern Unity State. This policy of excluding Bul from the leadership of the state dated back to the era of Khartoum Peace Agreement. When Dr. Riek Machar formed the Government of South Sudan Coordinating Council in 1997, an election was conducted in Unity State in which Paul Liliy emerged as a winner to become the Governor of Unity State. However, the political elites of Dok, Nyuong, Jagei and Jikany connived and annulled the election. Riek Machar issued a decree appointing Taban Deng Gai as a Governor in contravention of the democratic vote.
When late Paulino Matip realized that the undemocratic action of Riek Machar was meant to exclude Bul Nuer from governance, he ordered Peter Gatdet to fight the forces loyal to Riek Machar and Taban Deng to prove to them physically that Bul Nuer could not be treated like second-class citizens in Unity State.
What happened in December, 2013 is a repeat of 1998 conflict between Bul Nuer on the one hand and the rest of Nuer clans on the other hand. Basically, Taban Deng and Riek Machar repeated what they did in 1998 in Unity State in the form of staging a coup against President Kiir in Juba on December, 15, 2013 hoping that once they got rid of him from the center, they would deal with Bul Nuer afterwards.
The power-sharing ratios of IGAD are actually handing over Unity State to Taban Deng Gai and Dr. Riek Machar at the expense of Bul Nuer who have been defending the state from the rebels since the attempted coup of 2013. It is true that Taban Deng Gai and Riek Machar want the governorship of Unity State. This strategy is revealed by the recent IGAD’s peace proposal which claimed that the rebels of Riek Machar should be given 53% of power in Unity state.
However, IGAD should be assured that Bul Nuer will fight to defend the Government and the Constitution of South Sudan up to the last man because they know the political machinations of Riek Machar and Taban Deng which are directed against the rights of Bul to govern like anybody in the state. Bul Nuer will never accept the IGAD’s peace proposal which gives 53% of power to their traditional enemies in order to be treated as the second-class citizens and be excluded from political participation of Unity State. If Taban Deng and Riek Machar want to subjugate Bul Nuer akin to the Arab oppression of South Sudanese in the old Sudan, the Bul Nuer community, which is capable of fighting all the Nuer clans, will not accept the policy of exclusion.
The IGAD’s peace proposal, which gives the power of Unity state to the rebels at the expense of Bul Nuer who have been defending the Government since December, 2013, cannot be implemented without igniting more conflicts within Unity State. It is unfathomable and indigestible for Bul Nuer to relinquish the power of Unity state that they defended with blood and hand it over to Taban Deng and Riek Machar through IGAD’s peace proposal. Even God in heaven will wage a war against the IGAD for proposing a peace plan that will exclude Bul Nuer from governance, confirming the discriminatory policy Riek Machar and Taban Deng designed in 1998 that led to the first civil war in Unity state between Bul on the one hand and the rest of Nuer clans on the other hand.
In Upper Nile state, Gov. Simon Kun has the support of Dinka, Shilluks, Maban, and Kumo ethnic groups who voted for him in 2010. Besides, he commands a very big support among the Jikany Nuer of the state. His supporters would consider IGAD’s peace proposal of giving 53% of power to the rebels as a utopian idea which could not be implemented given the realities on the ground. In the Upper Nile state, the rebels of SPLM/A-in opposition control only Pagak payam within Jikany Nuer territories. Other Nuer areas are under the control of the state Government.
In Shilluk areas, Johnson Olony’s forces could be found in Panyikang County; however, their presence may slip away given the military situation on the ground which changes on an hourly basis.
In Jonglei state, the Governor and five Ministers of the state Government are Nuer who command a sizable support among Lou, Lak, Thieng and Gawaar Nuer. Despite the presence of rebels in Akobo, that does not mean that the people of Akobo County are entirely supporting the SPLM/A-IO. The Government’s Commissioner of Akobo, Hon. Timothy Taban Juch, commands the support of many Nuer sections in Akobo and is considered as a force to be reckoned with.
Part Three: The Nuer in the SPLA army defending the Government
It has to be brought to the attention of IGAD that the Nuer make up more than 80% of the SPLA army in Unity state; 50% of the SPLA in Upper Nile state and 20% of the SPLA forces in Jonglei state. Given the statistics of Nuer’s presence within the SPLA army in the three states of Greater Upper Nile Region, people may begin to wonder whether IGAD is fully aware that the Nuer in the SPLA army cannot accept implementing IGAD’s peace proposal that gives power to the rebels of Riek Machar without a fight. There is nobody in control who can relinquish power to the rebels who are defeated.
During the CPA negotiations, the SPLM/A was only given control of the areas that it militarily controlled. The areas which were controlled by the Sudan Government were exclusively given to the Government of Sudan. The SPLM/A, during the negotiations at Naivasha, was not given any percentage of power in Northern Sudan outside Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile because it didn’t have territorial control in the north.
If IGAD is attempting to duplicate the CPA power-sharing ratios, the problem is that SPLM/A-in opposition does not militarily control enough territories in the Greater Upper Nile Region to justify awarding 53% of power to the rebels. Statistically, the SPLM/A-in opposition does not control any territory in Unity state militarily. In that case, if territorial control would guide IGAD, then, reasonable people could conclude that the SPLM/A-in opposition cannot get any percentage of power-sharing in Unity state.
In the Upper Nile state, the SPLM/A-in opposition could only be found in Pagak payam and Panyikang County. If the arithmetic of territorial control is utilized by the IGAD, then, the SPLM/A-in opposition can get only 10% power-sharing in Upper Nile state.
In Jonglei state, the SPLM/A-in opposition controls Akobo, Pangak and Nyirol Counties of the Nuer for time being although such a control is subject to whether the rebels adhere to the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement. The other two Nuer counties such as Uror and Ayod are under the control of the Government together with non-Nuer counties. Based on the computation of territorial control, the three counties controlled by the rebels in Jonglei state represent only 15% of power-sharing in Jonglei. The territorial control in Jonglei state does not warrant the proposal of IGAD that gives 53% of executive and legislative powers to the SPLM/A-in opposition in Jonglei state.
Part Four: Conclusion
We the Commissioners of Nuer counties in the Greater Upper Nile Region support the attainment of peace in South Sudan. However, as people close to the grassroots, we cannot accept a political arrangement that is a recipe for another conflict in the country or in the Greater Upper Nile Region.
It is our sincere belief that the IGAD’s peace proposal will not bring peace in the country. But it is setting a dangerous precedent for the people of South Sudan that ethnicity must be dominant political arrangement. The IGAD’s peace proposal, if accepted, would mean that each tribe in Greater Upper Nile Region would have to form its own state rather than falling under the rule of SPLM/A-IO. If we allow such a scenario to happen in Greater Upper Nile Region, the trickledown effect will also affect the other regions because the minorities in those regions would adopt the same political virus.
We are beginning to accept that there are individuals within IGAD who are having a hidden agenda of destabilizing the South in order to be under the UN trusteeship once it explodes into an ethnic inferno. However, the people of goodwill within IGAD and the international community should accept the realities on the ground and reject the recent peace proposal in order to reflect the territorial control and the ethnic composition of the Greater Upper Nile Region so that the ordinary citizens can reap the dividends of peace.
It is to be mentioned that for peace to be implemented on the ground, much depends on us we the Commissioners who are on the ground working alongside Chiefs, elders and civil society organizations supported by the people of goodwill.
Signatories
1. Upper Nile state:
Hon. Gatkuoth Biem Nyoak, Commissioner of Ulang County
Hon. Paul Biel Chuol, Commissioner of Maiwut County
Hon. Gach Wol Guandong, Commissioner of Longichuk County
Hon. Elijah Liej Bany, Commissioner of Nasir County
2. Jonglei state:
Hon. Timothy Taban Juch, Commissioner of Akobo County
Hon. Peter Mabor Bol, Commissioner of Uror County
Hon. Nyang Chuol Dhuor, Commissioner of Nyirol County
Hon. Michael Buoth Malual, Commissioner of Ayod County
Hon. Both Chuol, Commissioner of Pangak County
3. Unity state:
Hon. Wal Yiey, Commissioner of Ler County
Hon. Bol Mayak, Commissioner of Mayom County
Hon. Nyuon Joak, Commissioner of Panyijiar County
Hon. Kawai Chany, Commissioner of Guit County
Hon. Salam Maliet, Commissioner of Rubkotni County
Hon. Khor Gatmai, Commissioner of Mayiandit County
Hon. Koang Biel, Commissioner of Koch County
CC:
1. President Barack Obama, USA.
2. Prime Minister David Cameron, United Kingdom.
3. Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Canada.
4. Ban Ki Moon, UN Secretary General.
5. IGAD.
6. Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn, Ethiopia.
7. President Yuweri Museveni, Uganda.
8. President Uhuru Kenyata, Kenya.
9. President Jacob Zuma, South Africa.
10. President Omer Hasan Bashir, Sudan.
11. President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Egypt.
12. Prime Minister Erna Solberg, Norway.
13. Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, Italy.
14. President Muhammadu Buhari, Nigeria.
15. President Abdelaziz Bouteflika, Algeria.
16. President Idris Deby, Chad.
–
The opinion expressed here is solely the view of the writer. The veracity of any claim made are the responsibility of the author, not PaanLuel Wël: South Sudanese Bloggers (SSB) website. If you want to submit an opinion article or news analysis, please email it to paanluel2011@gmail.com. SSB do reserve the right to edit material before publication. Please include your full name, email address and the country you are writing from.
About Post Author
