Is South Sudan conflict a political, resource or ethnic war?
9 min readBy Peter Mapuor Makur Malith – Nairobi, Kenya
July 28, 2015 (SSB) — Is ethnicity a curse or a blessing? Ethnicity is a debatable issue in political relationships. Particularly in Africa, ethnicity has been at the heart of much of the contemporary conflicts. Ethnicity is often portrayed as a trigger factor in many conflicts. Ethnicity is also often being blamed as a tool to mobilize people during conflicts.
In many parts of Africa people from different ethnicities live in peace and co-exist without any conflict. The country in point is Tanzania in East Africa. Tanzania is believed to be less ethnically politicized despite having one-hundred-20 ethnic groups. The two largest ethnic groups in Tanzania are linguistically and culturally closely related. The traditional homelands of the Sukuma and Nyamwezi are in western Tanzania, south of Lake Victoria. Then why is ethnicity such a great cause of conflict in other parts of Africa?
In most African countries, there’s a struggle over “who the God’s chosen people are” especially in the struggle for Christianity and Islamic religions. Religion just like ethnicity, people are sensitive about it because religion forms part of an individuals’ identity. Religion is not only an integrated part of individual identities, but it is also important for group identity. Religion and nationalism goes hand in hand.
Just recently, South Sudan ended a war in which it was plagued with conflict for many centuries. The conflict had been kept alive through all the years by the population’s differences of ethnicity, culture, religion and language. Some of the conflict has also been fuelled by contention over resources such as water, grazing land and oil reserves.
What about now? Is South Sudan conflict a political, resource or ethnic war?
Dear reader, you and I cannot boldly conclude that the conflict in South Sudan is purely a political, an economic, neither is it purely an ethnic war. If it were solely an ethnic conflict, then there would not have been a mixer of soldiers from the two antagonistic ethnic groups in both sides of the conflict. In some of the clashes it is Nuer that is fighting Nuer and Dinka that fights Dinka, such combinations depict that the conflict in South Sudan is not solely an ethnic conflict either.
Therefore ethnicity is a mere character of the conflict in South Sudan and the conflict is a mixture of ethnic, political and economic conflicts. As a matter of fact, in the past, Dinka and Nuer are two different ethnic groups that have been fighting for ages. Conversely, they haven’t been aggressing and butchering each other because of their ethnic differences.
Though there were numerous differences between the Arabs and the black people of the South, the Dinkas and the Nuer did live together. Dinkas and Nuer have differences but they have more in common than differences correspondingly. Apart from living in the same territories, having similar somatic features and rearing cattle, they also believe in one sole God. These two ethnic groups of South Sudan have an unending list of analogies and similarities and differences, which characterize them. The striking differences of the two ethnic groups have been cultural differences. The outstanding reasons for their clashes in history have always been over livestock’s’ ownership.
History tells that the era of political hatred commenced in the late 19th century when the British, Arab and Turkish traders exerted influence on the two ethnic groups in the area. The Dinka supported the British meanwhile the Nuer tended to resist the Arab and Turkish and this led to a conflict of the Dinka with the Nuer. The second political division of military supremacy in ethnic lines came in again in 1991 during the Nasir coup to overthrow a Dinka, late Dr. Garang De Mabior from the SPLM/A chairmanship by a Nuer, Dr. Riek Machar Teny. These conflicts led by the two men pushed the fight along ethnic dimension. This was contrary to the rests of the fights over the years that were instigated by struggle over cows.
What about the “Juba December crisis” in 2013? Were the two ethnic groups fighting over livestock ownership? Excuse me…there were no cows at Giada military garrison in Juba city. Even though the cause of crisis in Juba is still debatable, all of us have various thoughts on what happened in Juba. Apart from the stories around the SPLM National Liberation Council, I have my opinion too on what might have led to the “crisis of crisis” in Juba particularly.
I view South Sudan as having lost its democratic right tract exhibited by
- a) Violation of military (SPLA) act 2009 by allowing military officers openly intervenes into determining political issues in the country.
- b) Lack of accountability and transparency against leaders (Both Politicians and SPLA officers) who intentionally practice corruption
- c) Presidency’s dependence on hearsay knowledge on appointing leaders into public posts and abandoning leaders who should have engineered the national progress to wither/thwart.
- d) Random appeasement pardon of renegades without passing them through judicial and administrative procedures.
- e) Instability in areas of priority such as Abyei area, other areas at Sudan and South Sudan borders, internal conflict as in Jonglei state with Yau Yau insurgency in Lakes, Unity and Warrap states cattle rustling and inter-state and county conflicts.
- f) Power tug of war within the ruling political party (SPLM) and the different arms of government.
- g) Poor plans and lack of implementing a few set plans for rendering social services to the people e.g. Education, Health, Roads and infrastructure, Food security, water and sanitation and the like.
- h) Practice of tribalism by some Nuers, nepotism by some Dinkas, Regionalism by some Equatorians and favoritism by the confused litera-illiterates in granting national rights.
- i) Violation of the Transitional Constitution 2011
- j) Delay of Transitional Review process
- k) Lack of correcting the 2010 undemocratic electoral system
- l) Dependency on imported questionable food items lacking standard laboratories for testing the food and drinks viability and validity.
- m) Rushing into regional and international policies without proper commitment.
- n) Violation of human rights against both the nationals and foreigners.
- o) Inappropriate criteria of electing MPs of both national and state parliaments. No age limit and fixed educational backgrounds.
- p) Lack of ample number of judges to try millions of cases – Judiciary operating in Arabic.
- q) Bias court verdicts under duress
- r) Ruling with military culture
The above shortcomings were not mistakes committed by the president only but by also those who are now fighting the government – or the Dinka if you might be comfortable calling it that way. Before the crisis in Juba, which others call coup de tat, South Sudan was mirrored to have lost some ingredients of a successful nation. There were already
1) Lack of a National Agenda with the government
2) Lack of visionary team of leaders – No Right people in Right places
3) Poorly informed leadership
4) Poor governance/maladministration
5) Growth of Tribalism and nepotism
6) Leadership united by money
7) Conflict and lack of reconciliation
The above shortcoming in South Sudan meant that:
- The Army was left to continue behaving as a guerilla army and not a conventional one.
- The Economy was continuing to lose stability
- The country was not easily establishing strong foreign relations with the world
- Citizens were not being educated, as there were deliberate delay tactics in the domestic universities.
If at all such a mess was to be curbed, there should have been plans for a system change in the leadership of an elected leader president Salva Kiir. It should have been done through:
1) Building a National Agenda
2) Encouraging National Dialogue
3) Opening a political space
4) Retiring and rewarding freedom fighters in the army and in politics so as to abridge rewarding leaders with positions to exercise deliberate corruption for pension purposes which indirectly cause intentional insecurity instigated by impatient unemployed SPLA veterans and their loyalists.
If the neighboring or well-wishing nations known as the international community were bold enough, they could have aided our state as follows:
1) Guiding the Government in Building the National Agenda
2) Helping political rivals to come to dialogue on National issues
3) Helping the government to open political space and exercise democracy through elections, not decrees.
4) Advising the government to give freedom fighters benefits rather than appeasing them with public offices to reward themselves and hence agitating other freedom fighters not employed to cause insecurity.
Dear reader, if you’ve been keen reading this piece, it should be clear to you that the crisis in South Sudan is not just about Nuer and the Dinka ethnic groups. It should have been a war by those fighting for change/reform against those stuck in the cultural and military politics of 1950s, a war by those fighting to liberate those who only open the dark pages of our history, a war in the spirit of unity and hard work.
In good faith, Dr. Riek Machar is a wrong person to lead the war against the government in Juba for he is a part and parcel of the mess I expounded earlier. On the other hand, Mr. Salva Kiir, if at all he did, has no right to take to the frontline his ethnic group Dinka in an attempt to hold to his position. This is because the Dinka saying goes, “It’s so bad for a blind person to be led by a deaf person, because when a blind person complains that he/she has been pulled to the thorns, the deaf person cannot hear.”
Whose war makes sense here, for Salva Kiir or Riek Machar? I am not part of both wars. What clings me to Salva Kiir ina very small percentage is that he is an elected President and I have no right to curse or haul him out by bullet. If I (we) have changed my (our) mind (s) about him, I (we) can only wait to vote him out in the ballot box. On the other hand, Dr. Machar should lay down weapons to buy national smiles or my smiles rather, for reforms in the party SPLM and in the country at large.
Shame on you all the politically masturbated Dinkas and Nuers on both sides of the conflict! Of all the other ethnic groups in South Sudan, Dinka and the Nuer are both blindfolded by egocentrism or rather ethnocentrism of Dinka-ism and Nuer-ism. I am sure it’s only the dead Dinkas and Nuers who can pronounce unity from deep down their hearts for they have tasted the bitterness of the pointless conflicts. The living Nuers and Dinkas only want to unite verbally or fully at the cemeteries or in mass graves. Does it make us proud humans?
Culturally, Nuer are seen as being excellent but impulsive and arrogant warriors while Dinka, on the other, are seen as having abilities to achieve things in clever ways, often by deceiving other people and want to command. It’s because of such divergent traits that made them fight in the past. What about now?
Remember dear reader; South Sudan is not only for Nuer and Dinka because there are over 60 indigenous ethnic groups speaking more than 60 indigenous languages in the country. The popular ethnic groups in South Sudan include the Azande, Bari, Shilluk, Luo, Lotuho, Lopit, Boya, Acholi, Anyuak, Toposa, Murle, Didinga, Tennet, Moru, Madi, Balanda and Baggara among others.
The Dinka and the Nuer should reflect and deny being the laughing stock of the world by shifting from a conflict described as conflict between North versus South, Arabs versus Africans and Christians versus Muslims to a conflict of ethnic group versus ethnic group.
Our unity in grief through thick and thin in the dark days should be resumed through shutting up those with evil tongues during this tough time of trial. Let’s halt from wishing every muscular Dinka and Nuer to go to the frontline in order to kill and be killed by the antagonist ethnic group.
There is one “unitary” war that all ethnic groups, all South Sudanese, must fight – the war against institutional reforms and accountability mechanisms… Call me “The Cleverfool” if you wish.
–
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
