Interview with Mabior Garang de Mabior: Why I had to Resign from the Revitalized TGONU

Complied by Mabior Garang de Mabior 

Original Q&A which appears in this weeks East African Newspaper. The original was edited to fit in the newspaper, but this did not affect the message I intended to convey. I am only posting the original here for posterity and because there is no limit in terms of word count.

The interview was done by Fred Oluoch

Questions to Mabior Garang de Mabior:

1. You have resigned saying that President Salva Kiir’s side has no intention of implementing the agreement, what are your evidence? 

Mabior Garang de Mabior: Anyone who asks such a question has not read the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS). There is a matrix for the implementation of the Agreement. It is important for anyone who wants to have a serious discussion about peace in South  Sudan, to have such a discussion within the context of what was agreed.

Had you read the Agreement, you would not have asked me this question. There is not a single provision of the Agreement which has been implemented. The very Revitalized Transitional Government of National Unity (R-TGONU) was formed circumventing these provisions. The formation of government is not complete to this day, with neither state nor local governments in place.

The Revitalized Assembly has not been reconstituted, so the constitution was amended illegally. All this was done in the name of “giving peace a chance”. Well, unfortunately, it has been over 100 days since the formation of the Presidency and the Cabinet and there is still no progress. Rather, the security situation has deteriorated. 

2. You particularly cited the formation of transitional government without the implementation of security arrangements. To what extent is this a threat to the survival of transitional government? 

Mabior Garang de Mabior: The answer to this depends on the various stakeholders in the Agreement; if they were genuine they would pursue the reform agenda to its logical conclusion. In order for this to be done effectively, there must be a unified, non-partisan army and other organized forces. If not, the forces – which are loyal to the regime – will use the threat of violence to maintain the barbaric status quo.

In the absence of security arrangements, which include demilitarization of Juba and all major towns and civilian centres, disarmament of civilians, unification of forces and more; intercommunal violence and general insecurity will continue, hurting the already fragile economy in the process.

3. In your view, what do you think are the grand plans for President Kiir’s side? 

Mabior Garang de Mabior: The plan of the regime has been clear from the start. They have used their privilege of incumbency to mobilize international diplomatic pressure against the SPLM/SPLA (IO), so that we are persuaded to go to Juba and form a government in violation of the provisions of the Agreement.

While this was going on, the  regime co-opted the majority of the non-threatening opposition groups, dividing the opposition in the process . Their plan now is to use the illegitimate Presidency to dismantle the Agreement through voting. I call it, “using democracy to undermine democracy”. So far, it is working. One only needs to read the Agreement  to realize nothing has been done.

4. Wouldn’t it have been better to correct things from the inside as the Interior assistant minister dealing with security issues? 

Mabior Garang de Mabior: This sounds like a reasonable argument on a surface level. For the record,  I do believe it is better to “correct things from the inside”; however, I don’t think we mean the same thing by this statement. The statement assumes South Sudan has a similar social political history as the rest of the “Commonwealth” countries.

The reality, on the contrary, is that  the security arrangements are not in place, the political space to “correct things from the inside” is non-existent. Those who advocate for such tactics are usually people who are looking for an excuse to surrender. The internal struggle is spoken of as if it is somehow easier, but it is not.

If we go and “correct  things from within”, it still means a confrontation with President Salva Kiir. If “from within” means to abandon the reform agenda, then that is called surrender and we did not negotiate a surrender, it was a negotiated compromise. So yes, I do believe it is better to “correct things from within”, but in the absence of a unified army, that may very well lead to war.

5. You had initially contemplated rejecting the post. What do you say to your critics who say that you are a holdout not willing to compromise? 

Mabior Garang de Mabior: We are all entitled to our opinions. However, it is important to understand why I initially declined. If after eight months nothing was done to implement the critical tasks related to the pre-transition, namely security arrangements, what gives us the idea they will be implemented now? If the period was extended twice, initially for six months and then for 100 days, what gives us the idea that this time it will be different?

If USD 100 Million was squandered during this time and is unaccounted for to this day, what gives us the clue that forming the government prematurely will lead to peace? In addition, calling the correction of a violation a “compromise”, is mischief.  The Agreement itself is the compromise. To compromise more than this would mean it is no longer a compromise but an acquiescence to the untenable status quo.

If at least one thing had been done – just one – I would say they had a point. I am just an individual and I have endorsed the party’s decision to go to Juba and if the SPLM/SPLA(IO) is not a hold out party, how can I be? I am only challenging those who say there is peace, with facts. They too should counter with facts, not propaganda. I challenge them and yourself to show a single provision of the Agreement which has been implemented and I will make a public apology.

6. The wording of your resignation gives the impression that the TGoNU is going nowhere. Which scenario do you think is going to emerge? 

Mabior Garang de Mabior: The barbaric status quo – characterized by abject poverty and  intercommunal violence – is  likely to continue. I hope I am wrong in bringing  our partner’s intransigence to the public’s attention and that the unscientific way we  are implementing the Agreement bears fruit, because my being wrong would mean the people of South Sudan have achieved peace. 

7. CORONA-19 has slowed down the activities of TGoNU. Do you think things could have been different without the pandemic? 

Mabior Garang de Mabior: The current political leaders of South Sudan – the power elite – already did not care about the immense suffering of our people before Covid-19. If you look at the statistics of fragile states, we have consistently been in the top five for years now. The pandemic will only exacerbate the situation as we are yet to feel the full impact of the virus.

There are many governments which continue to work and provide services to the people, Kenya is a good example. In South Sudan, instead of being at the forefront of defining the “new normal” for our people, our leaders have buried their heads in the sand and have gone from denying the virus to ignoring  it. We may soon need a serious intervention or we risk being a regional threat in more ways than one.

National Conversation: Opinion on the Sherkat incident, by Mabior Garang de Mabior

In the first place, I don’t want to go into the details of the incident which took place in the Sherkat suburb of Juba, on the morning of 3rd June 2020. It is supposedly under investigation and my objective is not to assign blame in this pending case. I extend my heartfelt sympathy to the families of all those who lost their lives in this senseless violence. Coincidentally, my resignation was made public on the morning of June 3rd 2020, after I had submitted my letter of resignation to my Chairman and Commander in Chief, Dr. Riek Machar – on the night of the 2nd – the previous night. I had already written the resignation letter a week prior and had even discussed it with several colleagues. There is no cause and effect between my resignation and the unfortunate incident in Sherkat, which now threatens to morph into intercommunal violence.

I am appalled by the slaughter which took place at Sherkat; however, this is not an isolated case, it is in point of fact the status quo in our land. Inter-communal violence has become a weekly feature across the country since the formation of the Revitalized Transitional Government of National Unity (R-TGONU). The major catalyst for my resignation was the counter-insurgency war between the neighbourly communities of Jieng-Bor, Lou-Nuer, and Murle. In May, over 100 innocent civilians lost their lives in Lou land as a result of intercommunal violence. As I also mentioned in my resignation, there has been tension in Madi land between displaced pastoralists communities and the sedentary owners of the land. It is the same situation in Pajulu lamd. I did not mention the intercommunal violence in Yei River, in Tonj , in Warrap, in Lakes and the displacement of Murle civilians who are victims of the vigilantism which has replaced the rule of law in our nascent Republic.

The Sherkat incident is above all a criminal case and this is usually the genesis of intercommunal conflicts. In the absence of a strong criminal justice system, aggrieved citizens resort to vigilantism. The traditional elite politicise these criminal cases and use the resulting confusion to gain influence at the local level. These anti-people politicians are unable to mobilize support on a national level, so they use tribal politics as leverage to compete on the national level, dividing our peoples in the process.

This is mischief!

The Sherkat incident has sparked mass protests in Juba, Bor and other towns and – as alluded to above – in the absence of a strong judicial system, the result will be vigilantism and intercommunal violence. I would never call on any protestors to stop exercising their civil rights and liberties, so long as their demonstrations are peaceful – it is their right. In the same breath, I would never call on the youth to declare war on the government, they (government) would quickly crush any violent action. The best weapon in the hands of our civil population is the Agreement. The solution to the general problem of insecurity in our country – not just the Sherkat incident – can only be resolved by institutional reforms, starting with security. Those advocating for “justice for the victims”, must understand that this can only take place within the context of judicial reforms, guaranteed in the Agreement. The best way we can honor the memory of all our loved ones we have lost to intercommunal violence since 1914, is to establish a strong judiciary and this is guaranteed by the reform agenda in the Agreement.

The establishment of an investigation committee for the Sherkat incident is a great gesture by the Presidency of the R-TGONU; however, what about the other incidents which have happened in Abyei, Jonglei, Lakes, Tonj, Warrap, Yei River and other areas? Will there be a committee formed every time there is a homicide case? What will be the criteria for choosing which incidents deserve an investigation committee and which do not? This is not a solution. We cannot have selective outrage and only feel the pain of the loss of our citizens when it happens in one’s backyard, as it were. This is an indication that South Sudanese nationhood has not yet been engendered in us as citizens. The time has come for our peoples to nucleate into a people. The so-called political opposition has failed to bring about fundamental change due in major part to lack of internal cohesion among the various movements and parties. In the history of peoples’ strugggle, a divided opposition has never defeated the incumbent.

The Sherkat incident and the recent demonstrations in the Protection of Civilians Camps (PoCs), will go down in our history as the moment our peoples’ struggle matured from armed struggle to non-violent action. I salute the memory of the young people who were mercilessly gunned down by rogue security forces during the peaceful protests following the brutal Sherkat incident. The traditional elite claim that the R-TGONU is a regime of peace. If this is the case, peaceful demonstrations will become the litmus test of the Agreement. If our citizens cannot assemble freely to excercise their freedom of speech and expression and even make demands of a government which purports to represent them, then what kind of peace are we really talking about? There is no other way we will achieve peace in our country outside of implementation of the Agreement. It is the responsibility of every citizen who is serious about peace in our country to read and understand the Agreement, so that we can use it as a tool to alleviate the causes and effects of war. The provisions contained within the Agreement guarantee the kinds of institutional reforms which are a prerequisite for us to found a nation-state. The first Republic of South Sudan – characterized by political tribalism and an unbearable status quo – has been a colossal failure, there is no future in this model of nation building. The Agreement in Chapteer VI. – Parameters for Permanent Constitution – gives our citizens the opportunity to have a people-driven constitution making process. This is the only way we can dismantle the primitive first Republic of South Sudan and usher in a second Republic for the welfare and prosperity of our peoples.

A luta continua!

Cpt. Mabior Garang
Mobile Office
12/06/2020

About Post Author