In South Sudan, Rebellions Are Not Staged For Fame but for Genuine Political Reforms
By Wenne Madyt Dengs, Juba, South Sudan
December 13, 2017 (SSB) — Both violence and non-violence are all avenues of toppling a naughty regime based on international political context; although violence technique remains the quickest, but it is the most inopportune mechanism that leads to grievous damage to the State in which it’s set off within the short time like for the case of South Sudan where numerous people are reported killed, and half of the population fled the country.
From the onset of adverse internal revolts within the Republic of South Sudan, my special view is that there had been the great fissure in identifying weaknesses that could be used as tools of warfare to defeat the incumbent regime. One could have been wondering [like me] and asked the unanswered question on what prompted those who initiated their unsuccessful rebellions. Especially when a rebellion is started and its progress begins shrinking within the next few weeks.
What amuses somebody is how their leaders shamelessly call for peace negotiations when they see their muscles are contracting and growing placid against well-pumped swollen muscles of the government; hence, what comes in their mind is not what provoked them to launch insurgence but fear of instant defeat engulfs their due strength.
Besides, to my own understanding, most of the rebellions staged in South Sudan lacked subjectivity; instead, they’ve objectivity in the sense that they’re not in the position of winning comprehensive public interest in areas where the serving regime fails to satisfy public principal needs.
Look, a government may have an array of motives and objectives essential to its domination: power, wealth, position, reshaping the society as it did via fracturing of a ten states-based South Sudan to continuing numerous states-based South Sudan, and so on.
Those military generals and compatriots who are engaged in fighting in this nation should chiefly know that once the rebellion is declared there is no more room to seek negotiations. Rebellions are not staged for fame or for the sake of the name. This is because, in the scene of asking for the negotiation, the government will still try to preserve its goal.
Resistance, not negotiations, is significant for change in rebellions were deep-seated issues are at stake. In all cases, the struggle must continue to drive particular regime out of power. Victory is always determined not by starting a resistance and opts for negotiations; it’s through sensible use of most applicable methods available.
Changing a phase of fighting from violence to non-violence by itself is believed by the specific regime (i.e. South Sudan’s) which is being dealt with as an indicator of opposition’s susceptibility of which it gains an automatic primacy, and pays defeat ears to the rebel call for negotiation, taking a case on the spot from what government of South Sudan did to Cirilo’s men who are still stranded in Nimule for over ninety days-waiting for the government as well as peace brokers to support [the] negotiation.
What is the meaning of such calls for negotiation within a diminutive gestation for a rebellion? Is it not a prodigal son-like rebellion? I have little energy to shed on his (Cirilo) motives as to why he began his one-eyed rebellion. I just figure out maybe it was a miscalculated move from him and his men as a consequence of idle wealth, tribal incitement and inexperience.
To be exact, either organized or rampant brutalities do not always reproduce needed results for capitulation and cooperation for regimes like the one in South Sudan. In dominant-party situations like what it’s currently, staging a rebellion can be difficult because in such systems, a ruling party has dug deep roots within populations and it becomes hard to achieve particular objectives of a resistance.
South Sudan’s present regime is ever sensitive to actions and plans that threaten its functions. So, it can decide to threaten as well as punishing those who seem to know the reality; strike and failing to entertain its blur future.
The author, Wenne Madyt Dengs, is an aspiring South Sudanese poet and writer; he can be reached via: wennemdyt63@gmail.com
The opinion expressed here is solely the view of the writer. The veracity of any claim made is 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, plus a concise biography of yourself.
About Post Author
