What went wrong with the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A)?
13 min readWhat Went Wrong with the SPLM as a Liberation Movement, Duped Political Party
By Eng. Valentino Akec, Juba, South Sudan
June 10, 2015 (SSB) — The SPLM and its military wing (the SPLA), despite the ups and downs, has achieved its noble goal of liberating the people of South Sudan from the self proclaim ethnic and religious oppressive regimes of Islamic fundamentalists in Khartoum, indeed it has made the south Sudanese to be free people cherishing in peace in their own Country, a patriotic and historic achievement worth praising and glorifying the movement for, by freeing us from inhumane treatment of those pretending to be the people of racial superiority by being Arab race and Muslim Jelaba in the old Sudan is a noble goal as millions of lives were loss for it to be achieved, it is a mission accomplished although some of our brothers in the Nuba Mountains, Blue Nile and Darfur Areas today are still suffering and living in agony and pain, but our hope for sure is that, liberty and freedom shall soon be the price of their collective struggle by the will of God the almighty.
Indeed, the SPLM/A as an African liberation movement in Sudan, since its emergence in the year 1983, appeared militarily and diplomatically well organized and becoming much more stronger than it was expected, a movement which started as an armed struggle waging war against the sectarian regime in Khartoum was supported by the majority of the south Sudanese people, the urge to join the movement was in the heart of any single South Sudanese young and old at the time, the struggle started stronger and stronger because its leadership was more intact and united in file and rank during the first phase of the bush armed struggle (1983 to 1990). The SPLM/A fought relentlessly and made so many military victories in so many military fronts across the old Sudan, compliment to the military victories was also reflected on the strong media campaigns launched by the well trained staff in the movement, a situation then made the regime in Khartoum to suffer morally, militarily and diplomatically.
The SPLA military attacks against the regime’s army in many war zones couple with the strong media campaigns brought the regime into its senses, that it inflicted on the regime a lot of political carnage, hence, weakening the morality of the Islamic fundamentalists in Khartoum, as there was big losses of life in the ranks of regime’s army, its Militias and Jihadist recruits, most of whom were University students, it was a war not fought in proxy like it used to be during the Anyanya one (1955 – 1972), but by the real semi Arab youngsters of the brown skin from the Hamdi triangle, a situation which led automatically to rendering the regime’s army weaker and weaker in its morality as well as creating a big financial burden to the regime’s economy, resulting in the end to cause an acute political instability in the whole country of the former united Sudan, the SPLM/A had successfully did so despite the fact that, joining the war to be part of the SPLA combatants was firstly an individual and a personal decision to make based on your own courage and patriotism, this was the case before it could later turn into a compulsory mission when the Islamists declared Jihad on the people of South Sudan, and other marginalized areas on top of whom were the Christians and the people of the black skin that, of the African race).
Despite the fact that, it was also a voluntary, self sacrificial and a national mission without wages, salaries or emoluments, the SPLM/A leadership was more intact and united in their pursuit to the national agenda of wanting to transform the old Sudan into a democratic Country, a Country that treats its citizens equally without discrimination based on colour of the skin, religion, ethnic origin or geographical entity, The SPLM/A succeeded despite the fact that, some short sighted renegades from its ranks resisted the national agenda of the new Sudan (those who organized themselves at the time in what was termed as the (Anyanya 2), who then started waging war against the SPLM/A at the beginning of its formation in the year 1983 to 1985.
The SPLM high command and with its political vision and the military doctrine did very well during the bush time, it over sighted over the SPLA military operations, solicited for military and financial support as well as in the diplomatic fronts, so that if it was to continue united and intact as it was, big cities such as Juba, Wau, Malakal and others would have fell under the control of the SPLM/A earlier in time than the time of signing the CPA in the year 2005.
Unfortunately, the split in the rank and file of the SPLM/A in the year 1991 has caused a lot of damage we still suffer from today, Loss of innocent lives, destruction of property, divisions in the leadership ranks, disunity among the people of south Sudan on tribal and regional lines, became so rampant, a situation which gave the enemy then, an advantage to continue waging deadly war against the SPLM/A and the entire peoples of the African race in the Country, using some southerners who defected from the movement to fight their brothers as allied militia forces friendly to the regime’s army. It was a great setback for the movement at that time, and it is continuing to haunt us to this day.
Judging by the logic, sanity and conscience, the causes of the split back in 1991 were not convincing at all to say the least; ironically there was no any logical reason for the split though justified at the time for lack of democracy in the movement.
According to a common understanding of how militaries are trained all over the world, the SPLA as a military liberation army based on military doctrine and the SPLM as a political movement with its vision well defined in its manifesto, it was then illogical to practice democracy in its military ranks, because militaries across the globe are trained on soldieries and equipped with high military doctrine as opposed to the civilian doctrine, indeed what works in the military is the ranking per se, but not democracy as such, therefore, the split of 1991 came as a result of a well protracted effort from our common enemy (the Jallaba elites) to create divisions in the SPLM/A leadership, obviously it was (divide and rule policy was at play), unfortunately, the enemy succeeded in using some greedy and none patriotic personalities within the movement to implement its agenda of deterring the focus of the movement leadership off its initial course, and make the south Sudanese fighting against one another than to fight against the common enemy, ( the Jallaba).
This preposition of greed and selfishness was evidenced by the fact that, all those who defected from the main stream SPLM/A of Torit Faction on the pretext of lack of democracy in the movement, ended up joining the government they were supposedly fighting against in the year 1997, they signed with the most dictatorial Islamists regime in Khartoum a bad peace agreement, a peace document they called then as Khartoum peace agreement, and because of too much greed, they continued to split into more smaller units and factions in the course of six years, so much so that, they had to sign the agreement with the NCP regime in Khartoum not as one united block but as different smaller entities.
That agreement duped (Khartoum Peace Agreement 1997) created only accommodation positions to the top leadership, but there was nothing tangible for the low ranking officers and soldiers to benefit from, a situation that led to divisions after divisions within the ranks and files of the Nasir faction so much so that, Kerubino Kuanyin had to rebel against the regime he had signed an agreement with, he had to militarily storm Wau Town on the night of 28th January 1998 in a disorganized armed rebellion against Khartoum’s Army and was repulsed and chased away from Wau to the outskirts with so many of his soldiers killed at Grinty military barracks, Arok Thon met his fate in a suspicious plane crash later in the same year of 1998 and Dr. Riek Machar had to run back from Khartoum to the SPLM/A main stream in 2002, and without the troops he initially led to Khartoum.
From the above chronological chain of events, it is clear that, the motive for the split back in 1991 was not a quest for democracy in the movement as it was declared by the splinter Nasir faction as the reason for the split; instead the greed for positions and the wealth was the key driver and the main objective for that rebellion..
Finally, and at its military peak and political strength, the SPLM/A main stream under its capable leader, late Dr. John Garang De Mabior managed to successfully negotiate and concluded a just peace deal with the regime in Khartoum, an agreement that has numerous protocols combined together to be what was called (the comprehensive Peace Agreement) in the year 2005, the (CPA 2005), it was unprecedented agreement that gave south Sudanese for the first time in the history the right to self determination, wealth sharing, power sharing and two armies among others, and it was what paved the way in the end for the independence of South Sudan.
What Went Wrong with the SPLM as a Political Party?
During the interim period (2005 to 2011) and up to the present day, the SPLM was duped as a political Party rather than the movement, and it became the ruling Party of the whole geographical entity of South Sudan, and was also the main partner in the Government of national Unity of the united old Sudan.
Some few SPLM cadres assigned to some important tasks, and with their background of military training resisted transforming and adjusting themselves to the characteristics and ethical norms of becoming Political Party members, some cadres do not even show or display attitudes and tendencies some characters of what it makes to be a well trained soldier, it is a common track in the military conduct that, there is always a clear chain of command, that, anyone in the army must strictly adhere and abide by the orders of the superior rank, not to detract from that conduct, otherwise disciplinary measures are taken against that member of the army, but in our case in South Sudan, the opposite was the case, insubordination, illusion, corruption, incompetence and none knowledge of the duties, obligations and rights of a Party member, or government official was seemingly the order of the day with impunity during the entire interim period, (2005 – 2010), the word comradeship seem to have wiped away the ranking hierarchy in the Party, as members see themselves with their superiors as equal mates, and with more allegiances to the tribe or the region.
Indeed the SPLM was made to become a Political Party only in name but not in the true Partisan content, that situation was what made it to continue as SPLM, while in a new Country called south Sudan, the SPLM did not transform and evolve itself to the new situation of being a Political Party in a new Country, and this is because there was no unity in the vision, the top leadership of the Party was not united in fighting the odds that are facing the young nation, fighting corruption, redefining the Party vision and direction among others was not at the hearts and minds of many, as there was no one methodology developed to address it, even the changing of the name of the Party, amending the Party constitution and other important documents such as code of Party business conduct and internal regulations, there was an acute divisions in the leadership over these documents, those seemingly vocal about the lack of democracy within the Party do not abide by democratic ethics and norms of heeding to the choice of the majority in some contested issues, issues of no consensus that requires voting to decide an action course over them, the majority vote was not being respected, instead, those opposed to the resolve decision of majority keep on with their opinions denoting others of having dictatorial tendencies, forgetting that, their behavior of not conceding to the opinion and the decision of the majority in the Party or Government is undemocratic tendency and it is what created the crises we are suffering from today.
Apparently, the blame can be on SPLM leaders all, that a ruling Party that has all the opportunities in the Country ended up with no news paper, no decent building for its secretariats and no disciplinary code for its dishonest members, such that, the secretary general of the Party was heard vocally lamenting and regretting the loss of vision and direction in the public media, a situation seemingly suggesting that, the SG of the SPLM Party do not really know he was the one at the driver seat of the Party, so that, if there was some kind of deviation from the SPLM vision coupled with the loss of direction, he equally takes the bigger part of the blame and failure in this case, the SG in any political Party as I know is the most powerful man than the chairman/woman of the Party, it can be quite understandable in the case if the Chairman/woman resisted any reforms, or any administrative and political changes in the Party, the SG has to resign and declare to the Party members the reasons for his/her resignation, but to criticize the system he is collectively leading with others thinking that, it would be the chairperson of the Party or the President of the Republic to bear the blame and carry his own cross alone is illicit and completely ridicules.
The leadership hierarchy of any political Party or the Government in any Country is supposedly a team working group and is a collective responsibility, each member compliments the other, each individual in the team endeavors to bridge the gap within the system, but not to discredit one another for any hurdles and failures encountered through the exercise of implementing Party policies or the Government activities.
SPLM as a political Party, has not really evolved and transformed itself into a real political Party in the real sense, effective disciplinary measures have not been in place, instead members of the Party have no clear chain of command, many lacked dedication and sacrificial spirit, that is why some individuals are seemingly vying for a position their comrades are holding, the evidence comes from what we have seen in the April 2010 elections, when some members declared themselves as independent candidates to run against their own colleagues in the Party, everybody in the Party wants himself installed in a higher political position in disregard to the Party hierarchy, norms and ethics of democracy, and this is the spirit that triggered and took us back to the current senseless war in the nascent nation.
In fact, democracy is easily talked about by so many as the reason and justification to take up arms to fight against the nation, but in reality, it is difficult to reflect it in oneself daily practice.
The way forward:
In order for our Party to follow correct Partisan passage, it must start doing the following:-
- Takes major steps of implementing the Arusha Party reunification Agreement, as home grown solution to the current crises in the Country.
- Redefinition of objectives, principles and policies of the Party.
- Trains its cadres on the democratic norms and ethics.
- Makes serious reforms in the way the Party conducts its business.
- Educating its membership on the rules and laws guarding the Party.
- Adopting strong disciplinary measures through proper chain of command.
- Must try to learn experiences from some African armed struggle movements turned Political Parties.
- Abolishes trends of some leaders clinging on regional or tribal inclinations and political allegiances rather than loyalty to the Party.
- Educates south Sudanese on how best we can be equal citizens with equal rights and obligations living in one Country as one people.
- Creates a think tank centre within the Party, with a media outlet managed by media professional cadres capable to educate the Party members and the entire Country population on the vision, direction and the policies of the Party.
- Develops a clear strategy on how to fight the odds, and how we can prosper as one people, how we can discuss, manage and resolve differences in opinion through peaceful approaches.
- Defines real friends, and enemies of south Sudanese people such that, a clear strategy can be drawn to approach or encounter them.
- Sensitizes the membership of the Party on team working spirit and how promotions are gotten through hard working, credentials and academic merits.
- Takes serious steps towards reconciliation, forgiveness and accountability.
- Makes well styled checks and balances in its ranks
God bless South Sudan
Valentino Akec writes in Juba, reachable at (valentinoakec@yahoo.com) and (0955623595).
–
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 does reserve the right to edit the material before publication. Please include your full name, email address and the country you are writing from.
About Post Author
