Rushing with Transitions Time in South Sudan: Good thing or bad thing for the new nation?
10 min readBy Marol Diingbol
“A free press can of course be good or bad, but, most certainly, without freedom it will never be anything but bad….Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better, whereas enslavement is a certainty of the worse.” By Albert Camus
“I always say if you are outside leadership position, you often see things differently than a person within the leadership actually. Again, you always feel yourself like Mr. /Mrs. Knowing everything. The one inside the leadership becomes like Mr./Mrs. Unknowing everything from outside leadership peoples. It is what it is in our lives as human beings with short side knowledge of everything God has given us.” By Garang de Faith & Truth
Interesting quotes, aren’t they? I had been just wondering around this question for quite sometimes, yet I didn’t come up with legitimate answers I would have thought of. Even though I had tried my best to answer this question, still I look like I am not certifying with my own answers on this article in one way or another. However, I did try my best to come up with this article to throw a light on what I had in mind about this puzzle. Also, I was related this question of mine in regard to our today era of freedom of speech or press as citizens of the new nation. Because in recent years over the globe, I don’t think if there has been any nation citizens like in South Sudanese case which is still a young country and it citizens have admitted unbelievable masses of raw messages or media into the thread of world’s networks. It is an amazing thing to see that again from just a created country. So the question would be, are we really helping or hurting the younger country with too much un-filtered criticism and advice being put forth on press or media towards our younger nation? In other words, what might happen to the new nation of ours if we keep feeding on the un-filtered messages and media into the world network of technology? Just think about it a minute, the nation that was fought for 22 or 23 years or 40 years if we add 17 years of the first civil war. I am just speechless about where all these would take a new nation to. Either way, it might lead it to good leadership way and/or it might lead it to a bad leadership who knows. But personally, I wish it would not turn our younger country to negative direction rather than to good leadership directions in which I preferred the most for the new nation.
Media or press freedom in whatever shape or form you call it in South Sudan. Consequently, this year I came across message stating that, “most of South Sudan media were bribed by some elites to report their interests.” Not that only though, as I had been monitoring some media outlet in South Sudan in recent years, no doubt in my mind that there had been neglect, ignorant, and nepotism base reports and not truly reports based on integrity of journalism. There are certain constituencies or tribes in South Sudan being ignored when it comes to their important things need to be known to South Sudan citizens or the world media at large about their government. Also losing of interests between government and media is another threat to new upcoming democracy way to South Sudanese. So I am worrying that in this earlier stage of new nation populace losing trust about media or free press. The reason why I am worry about media losing interest on media reports is a threat to new emerging system of leadership so-called democracy. Because I believe journalism is one of the main elements that always sustain democracy system any way. By the way, I don’t blame those who did take their side to depend on their tribal or constituencies’ interests stand after they have seen media or journalism in South Sudan becomes dishonest in their reports in whatsoever.
I love this, Dr. John Garang de Mabior onetime said, “the war we have fought for 22 years, its freedom benefit was not for those who were born before 1983, but the freedom enjoyment was to be for those who were born in 1983 onwards.” Where to go! Dr. John Garang de Mabior, I do believe you were ultimately right about this quote of yours back then when you said it. Why? Because in every human society ever exist and did pass through any conflict or war time period. The freedom often brought upon after conflict or war never ever benefits the war time generations except sometimes few individuals from the conflict or war time generations. So if that is the point, then the living generation of South Sudan who were born over that period whom our hero, and founding father of South Sudan had adherent in his quote. I think the citizens of South Sudan should take that quote as an instrumental way to judge its new country. Because too much rushing criticism and advice or judgments against new nation might not help that much in its progress, but rather it might bring down the young country to the dust days of civil war or the days of Deng & Abuk (Adam & Eve) in Dinka language. I know, we the remnants of the second civil war and at the time people who were born before 1983 in relation to Dr. John Garang de Mabior quote, again, I could see we are trying to force ourselves into freedom enjoyments yet we are not really deserve to enjoys it when I consider the historical times of war or conflict generation reasons. If you are wartime person from South Sudan, please take it easy with patience and reasonable attempts against the new country of ours.
To my critics on the other side of the prism point, passionately you have to know that I am not against the freedom of speech or press over the new nation as long as it is not an overboard criticism and advice that might cause more chaotic environments. What we need as I believe; we just need to be more careful and fair enough thought in our own criticism concerning new country affairs. Also, too much advice to its new adopted systems of democracy leadership styles shouldn’t be put into jeopardy at this earlier stage, because too much advice might endanger the process or progress of that system of democracy way which was not there in our old leadership way before. Democracy is an ongoing adoption or raring thing to our people. So my advice to citizens of South Sudan, please always be vigilant over criticism because that country of ours is like a newborn baby or infant. In which to the parent of the newborn baby, it is always not a good idea for them to starts beating their child violently when he/she still at that earlier stage. Particularly, at the time the baby or infant still don’t talk or having conscious sense or reasoning between right and wrong. Anyway, apparently I base my analogy of child beating on ancient times, and not this modern time of ours though whereby there is no more beating of children in whatsoever. By comparison, I believe South Sudan nation to us as citizens in my personal view; the new country is like a young child that you always don’t want to starts beating too much before even he/she really understands why he/she has been beaten hardly. So the child might repeat the same mistake again if not.
In military, people always say, “don’t ever ever ask military personnel at the time he/she just arrived from the really battle field zone. You are always advised to ask military personnel after he/she has decided to talk about the really stuff related to a battle field affairs’ scenes, otherwise, you might had been there too at the battle field red zone.” Why I have to bring this quote of military affairs in battlefield (frontline)? Well, South Sudanese should know that the majority of our leaders from South Sudan right now were just arriving from the battlefields. That means they need to be addressed in such a way that might not alienate their attitudes back to military memories they had witnessed during the civil war time. If that happens, my concerns would be; they might use that old system of military styles upon the people they lead at the moment. As my personal opinion, the only way I think they should be addressed with patience when it comes to their leadership; also I think it would be a good way to assist them until they become familiar with the new leadership style of democracy. It is not so long ago, the civil war in which I believe most South Sudanese did witness it, and at the same time it was just ended almost eight years ago. Even now I am writing this article, it has not finished yet the half of 22 years whereby the second civil war has taken, anyway. In addition too, most of our leaders are right now on the process of learning a new system of democracy leadership whom most of them I believe were not brought up through system of democracy leads before.Individually, I think the leadership body of new country needs sometimes to learn democracy way of management without too much pressure being put upon them. By the way, I should say that; in reality South Sudan though was not an independent nation yet until last year. That means the true leadership of South Sudan is just only a year and some of months year old. You have to know that I don’t count six years prior to South Sudan nation independence on July 9, 2011, because Sudan was still one government under the same old leadership of Khartoum.
The reason why I had been stayed away or restrained myself from South Sudan many political affairs in which I have abilities to reckon with though, it is not that I don’t know how to play the game of politics but it is because I still believe that South Sudan has not yet crossed the period of transitions or incubations to the level that is an appropriate for too criticism when it comes to people like me who know more about how the leadership system works. Also to me, it is too earlier to starts too much criticism when it comes to the attributes of the new emerging democracy system of leadership to South Sudan. The new emerging leadership based on democracy way needs time to grow as a legitimate system that would able to suite many citizens of South Sudan who have never been introduced to democracy way of leader since the creation days I believe. By the way, this short and brief message of mine was the main reason why I had been distant myself from South Sudan too much criticism game of it politics. Also it was another reason why I had been known that much on free press that had been advocating of tribe like Dinka history or identity. Even though some people sometimes consider history as politics, of course it would be in some point a politic as well but often history is not a pure politics. There are few main differences between the two phenomena. For instance, as a person that has been blessed with many ambitious, I have ability to differentiate things like these phenomena: Religion have Doctrines meanwhile the Politics have Policies and so goes the other disciplinarians like History are having their own rules, policies, guidelines, and so forth.
“The smarter the journalists are, the better off society is. [For] to a degree, people read the press to inform themselves-and the better the teacher, the better the student body.” By Warren Buffett
“The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses.” By Vladimir Lenin
“Weak-heart person always spent too much time on stupid things that are every times against good and legitimate stuff , meanwhile the dignify hearted person always spent too much time on beneficial things to others through respect and honor professionalism arguments or pursue without smearing his/her works with nonsense things” By Garang de Faith & Truth
“Whenever words trust, true telling, accountability, justice, respect of other people right and dignity, and many more are being over taken by words ignorant, lies, propaganda ideals, neglect, screw up of truth, jealousy, envy and so forth. There always be possibility of any society or entity would bear negative arsenals than positive arsenals in creditability.” By Garang de Faith & Truth
You can reach the author through his email at: southsudaneditingservices@yahoo.com
About Post Author
