South Sudan’s Addis Ababa Negotiations in Muddled Water
6 min readBy Malith Alier
Peace is desirable but anyone who wants peace should instead prepare for war. After war therefore, is genuine peace achievable. This maxim is seen after many wars around the world in general and South Sudan in particular.
The former VP, Machar fought in the SPLA and defected to become a militia leader allied to Khartoum but humiliatingly returned to the SPLA fold with bitter experiences. Peace was for that matter attractive to him after those experiences. This is the case even today. Nobody takes up arms in order to surrender tomorrow so soon without exhaustion. The Anya-nya was in the bush for 17 years and that of SPLA is a little more over 20 years.
This is not to say that the author is beating a drum of war. Nobody knew that what started in capital, Juba will spread to other parts of the country like bush fires seen in dry parts of the world. The conspirators have good reasons to have orchestrated and even better reasons to sustain it beyond anyone’s belief. The dichotomy of coup and no coup is now irrelevant. The conflict has continued to metamorphose to dangerous levels day by day.
One well placed gentleman from the SPLA but is now on a reserved list warned us three days after what was believed to be a coup that the war has just started and will take some time to settle. This warning was taken lightly by us but it is clearer now after more than three months and the rhetoric continuous unabated.
South Sudan is now a country at crossroads, the road to peace and the road to peril. Many friends and well wishers to this country want to take the country back to peace. However, there are insurmountable obstacles and contradictions on the road to peace. Some of those are of our own making. There are also a host of historical injustices, crimes and misdemeanours which will not help a great deal even if we continue to talk about today.
There still exists the usual war of words after signing the secession of hostilities in Addis on the 23 January 2014. This means that the agreement was imposed on the parties by external actors particularly the IGAD in the hope that the parties to the conflict would honour it. Truly, this is the first test of well intentions of IGAD, AU and UN. In addition, this test if well executed will allow the mediators to move the parties to the next level. However, despite signing secession of hostilities accord, the war is still raging and so is the mobilization of combatants as well as the war of words or propaganda by the rebels.
As much as the mediators and the international community would like to halt the atrocities and stop the war, they exhibit contrary actions that are unhelpful in their endeavour. These actions send wrong signals to the warring parties and bring confusion to the situation as a whole. It is advisable to handle issues step by step towards final solution of the conflict.
Initially immediately after conflict broke out, the Americans and the UN denied that it was a coup and therefore, demanded for immediate release of the accused plotters. The people of this country are baffled by this attitude of the US government. This is a second time for the USA to meddle in internal affairs of South Sudan after that of Panthou/Heglig. Then, comes the constant demand for withdrawal of Ugandan troops. One wonders what USA is up to.
It has been alleged that the US is the largest donor to South Sudan government and is threatening sanctions on the country. Money at this time fights no war and the US government is advised to stop it for time being. America, the world watch dog rushed to Bor to rescue her citizens in the wake of the uprising but left the vulnerable South Sudanese to be slaughtered by white army, a supposed vengeance about what happened in Juba on the coup day. Now one fails to understand why USA is coming back to condemn what has saved our skins and what is left of our belongings in Juba. One would conclude that the US government has a hidden agenda to mete out on South Sudan. Both demands for release of detainees and withdrawal of UPDF are not supported by ordinary citizens of this country.
If history is anything to go by, the President in the past tried a conciliatory approach on various rebel groups but this was abused and the result is what is seen today. This policy of appeasement to the International community and rebels was destined for failure as seen now. No country should be ruled by another country in this century. This is to say that the USA problems are not similar to South Sudanese problems. America is fighting Islamic terrorism but South Sudan is fighting a different kind of terrorism in form of rebel militias and the white army.
President Kiir has been wrongly branded as a dictator. This is a view of those who have not read him well. Luka Biong Deng responded to the president’s critic that the humble man in the hat is a consensus builder. Indeed, the South Sudanese president is a reluctant leader who has not fully internalised the assumption of leadership responsibilities. For any leader to be effective, he has to be hands on manager ready to face any problems head on. Instead, our president is more like an angel. How can you explain his handling of the coup detainees who were well fed, were not tortured, none has had a heart attack in the detention? Everyone should appreciate this man before he departs the scene. Many South Sudanese including this author are extremely frustrated with this softly approach. There is time for everything as narrated in the holy Books. A time to laugh and time to be serious.
For peace to be successful and help the mediators, everybody feels that they should be included, women groups, Church leaders, Youth groups, political parties, and any other groups or individuals with the same feelings. The issue of religious leaving the word of God to be deeply involved in country’s politics is an issue that should worry us. They are involved in reconciliation commission; they are negotiating with SSDA or Yau Yau group. Who will preach the word of God if the religious leaders have become part and parcel of politics at the highest level?
All South Sudanese should not make mistake to assume that war always brings something meaningful to every living soul. The Any-nya war is a testimony for South Sudan. Another was brought destruction to the people of this nation is that of Riek in 1991. It brought destruction to Bor and other former Upper areas. Costs associated with any war include; militarisation of civil population, increased disability, displacement leading to several IDP camps, increase of refugees, destruction of property, loss of life, disorientation of business activities, scarcity of commodities.
You can reach the author through his E-mail: alierjokdeng@gmail.com
About Post Author
