To be or not be – South Sudan on the balance (Part 2)
9 min readCompromise Peace Agreement is signed – what next.
Joseph Lino Wuor Abyei, Juba, South Sudan
August 31, 2015 (SSB) — On August 21, 2015 “paanluelwel.com” website published an article by this writer under the title “To be or not to be – South Sudan on the balance” and concluded by stressing that “the future of this country is on the balance, either to be or not to be. This requires consensus, wisdom and courage.”
During the period of over twenty months or so, the people of South Sudan, the government of the Republic of South Sudan and President Salvatore Kiir Mayaardit in particular were all subjected to an unprecedented pressure from the United States of America in particular. As a result the president conjured wisdom, gathered courage and sought consensus and signed the document in front of regional witnesses.
Therefore:
Wednesday August 26, 2015 president Salvatore Kiir Mayaardit signed the Compromise Peace Agreement as dictated by the UN, US, UK, Norway through IGAD with very “strong reservations.” As usual the USA, in the words of Suzan Rice vehemently threatened that Kiir Mayaardit should sign without any conditions, or face sanctions. However, those were defining moments for the Republic of South Sudan, to be or not to be.
Nevertheless, storms are still a head and nobody knows what may or may not happen. That is why President Salvatore spelled it out clearly to the witnessing four IGAD leaders that the government of South Sudan will implement the provisions of the agreement in good faith, and asked IGAD to assist in implementation. He then drew the attention of the four witnessing IGAD leaders to the fact that at the time of signing of the agreement news came in that rebel attack on Bentiu was still going on. On Friday 28 and Saturday 29 rebels mounted attacks on Malakal.
In the light of these developments this writer thinks that signing the compromise peace agreement is not an end but a prelude to subsequent drastic developments.
Watching the ceremony from SSTV screen, this writer was keen to listen to and watch the body language of the four IGAD leaders to confirm or dispel the general notion that IGAD – Desalegn in particular and Sudan in particular were deep up to the chest in the “regime change conspiracy” theory.
The First Vice President of Sudan Bakri Hassan Saleh sounded sincere when he expressed his congratulations on the signing of the Compromise Peace Agreement and wished well for the people of South Sudan. His statement was very short because there was nothing to say. We should not forget that rebels have their head office in Khartoum and get their supplies from and mount their attacks from Sudan. And here Bakri looked and sounded innocent in his short speech.
In a serious statesmanship manner, President Uhuru Kenyatta stressed that people should not dwell on the past but rather look into the future and that they should rather focus on the present and forget the past, sign the agreement and they will stand to support implementation. Strong words seriously spoken which sounded not to portend any lingering shadow of a suspicion that the man maybe playing to emotions.
In his remarks the Ethiopian Prime Minister Haile Maryam Desalgen struck a similar note that there is nothing to do but to sign the peace agreement so that the people of South Sudan may live in peace. Sincerity showed on his face. We should bear in mind that rebellion leaders reside in Addis Ababa, and large numbers of Nuer rebels are Ethiopians.
As usual, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni expressed his advice in a refined African traditional proverbial wisdom with anecdotes here and there. By doing so President Museveni probably wanted to prove that he is a wise man and a very close friend to the people of South Sudan, and that he is here to assist solve the crisis.
Museveni’s remarks were studded with proverbs that evoked laughter at the time when the atmosphere was emotionally charged. He passed through idioms and examples to tell a short story about the importance of signing the Compromise Peace Agreement so that no one should point at South Sudanese leaders as intransigent. He did this because as if he was aware that pro government South Sudanese were against the compromise peace agreement in spirit and letter, to them the agreement is a sellout in toto.
To clarify the point Museveni quoted an American General who gave his view on the war his country waged in Korea that it was the wrong war fought in the wrong place and fought at the wrong time. Museveni then identified between “a just war and an unjust war,” that just wars are fought to preserve and to protect identity, to achieve prosperity and to safeguard security, and that South Sudanese had fought during the Anya-nya liberation struggle for the reasons mentioned i.e. to protect identity, to achieve prosperity, to safeguard security, and that if that is the case then what is this war all about? His Excellency concluded that “this war is unjust … it is a wrong war fought at the wrong time,” and that “the sooner it is ended the better,” strong words of wisdom coming from a friend. Are there enough ears to listen and enough minds to understand?
President Museveni drew the attention to the negative effects of war on oil production and that this ongoing conflict has invited neighbors to interfere into the internal affairs of South Sudan, and advised to “get foreigners out of your country… avoid UN to enter into your country,” and that he never invited the UN into his country. He said that “if you mismanage your affairs all foreigners will come into your country, get rid of foreigners and regain your dignity.” This is pure wisdom. Underline “mismanagement.” Watching him on SSTV screen the man sounded candid as shown by his body language.
To answer Museveni’s query that what is this war fought for? The government should easily answer that they are fighting to protect the identity, to preserve the integrity and to strengthen security of South Sudan. Here the war can be seen as just.
However, the rebel leader has never spelled out why he is fighting till this moment. The rebel leader should have been asked why he is fighting; is he fighting to separate Greater Upper Nile and establish a separate state, is Nuer tribe fighting to join Ethiopia given the fact that the majority of Nuer tribe extends into Ethiopia, or are Nuer fighting to rejoin Sudan, or perhaps they are fighting to dominate the other tribes. It seems that no one asked these questions before hence the war should be seen as “senseless.”
This writer contemplated that suppose Kiir refused to sign and recited all the reasons he could, what would happen? The UN, US, UK and Norway with or without IGAD may impose “targeted sanctions” and “arms embargo,” and so what; there are so many countries under sanctions. But for sure, South Sudan will not die at all if its people determine not to, and the world will not come to an end at all.
However, there is something called “kong-kooch” which means wait a minute – this is a call to use reason. In many cases “reason” is in short supply and that is why conflicts suddenly erupt and escalate – look at a once peaceful Yemen now in turmoil. Unfortunately the UN, US, UK Norway are so fond of threatening to impose “selective” sanctions and arms embargo on certain countries suffering internal or regional conflicts. They should be told to “kong-kooch” and see what is the issue.
Following his last arrival from Addis Ababa Hon Michael Makuei Lueth mentioned that “in fact sanctions have already been imposed on us.” The United States of America and the UN, UK and Norway should have known that imposition of sanctions on some countries, poor or not, usually produce undesired results as they tend to galvanize support of the people behind their governments for better or for worse and increase misery. Therefore, sanctions often fail as they have failed in Iran, North Korea, Sudan and so on although they cause social damage; is this what the US is aiming at, to harm the people of South Sudan?
Or the UN, US, UK and Norway may opt to invade South Sudan by using IGAD forces. Hundreds or thousands may perish in the process. Then what? If they succeed they may install a puppet and begin to use the resources of South Sudan to finance their operations and in the end they will depart and leave South Sudan prostrate and in turmoil far worse than it was just like they have left Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, DR Congo, CAR, some very poor West African countries in shambles. Will IGAD accept this dirty role and stab South Sudan on the back or in the chest; will any IGAD or non IGAD country escape this humiliating treatment in the future? President Kiir Mayaardit last year reminded IGAD leaders that “today is my turn and tomorrow will be someone else’s.”
Those who advised President Salvatore to go ahead and sign showed consensus, statesmanship and wisdom. President Kiir exhibited courage when he decisively decided to sign. Is this what the UN, US, UK Norway wanted?
This writer stands to be proven wrong on an opinion that the four African leaders who came to Juba to witness the signing of the Compromise Peace Agreement were not stooges, were not in the business of selling South Sudan to UN, US, UK, Norway or to any other greedy near or far away power for a few or large amounts of money.
Rather the four IGAD leaders including the Vice President of Sudan, again this writer stands to be corrected on the ulterior motives of the Vice President of Sudan given the strain relations, had the interests, the dignity and the well-being of the people of South Sudan at their hearts. This was finally reflected on the relaxed mood of Salvatore Kiir Mayaardit and on all those who were attending the signing ceremony.
What is so important above everything is the stability, the dignity and integrity of the Republic of South Sudan poor as it is. Somebody should educate the UN, USA, UK, and Norway that South Sudan is a very young country and lacks experienced manpower to manage affairs in this fast changing world. Even though the chips are down, there is room and time for diplomacy.
The writer hopes that the diplomats should not abandon President Kiir Mayaardit to face the “International Community” alone which seemed bent to experiment on South Sudan. If not, President Salvatore should decide to depend on himself; begin to travel far and wide to explain the nature of the conflict.
To be or not to be – South Sudan is still on the balance.
You can reach the author through his email: josephabyei@yahoo.com
–
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
