Rethinking South Sudan’s National Conversations: The Concept of ‘Greater’ in South Sudan Politics and its Implications
4 min read
By Dut Garang Dau, Cairo, Egypt
Monday, September 26, 2022 (PW) — A simple peruse of the Sudan’s and South Sudan’s historical records exposes numerous misnomers. Individuals, tribes, and places have since then adopted a change of name. For example, the Shilluk are rightfully Chollo. The word Dinka has no meaning in the Jieng tribe. They preferably call themselves Muonyjang.
The current Malakal was Makal and Juba, Jubek. The Lotuho of Eastern Equatoria is now called by the majority as Lotuko. Changes came and stayed for a long time, some of them easy to correct while so much of them remain. However, the concept of ‘Greater’ has far more political implications than all. Please read it with me.
You may wonder why we have the Greater Pibor Administrative Area and not the Greater Ruweng Administrative Area. Of course, there is the Ruweng Administrative Area. That shows, apparently, the word ‘greater’ as used in South Sudan politics has an apt meaning attached. In the Warrap State of the Bhar El Ghazal region, for instance, we had two greaters: Greater Tony and Greater Gogrial. A similar pattern was found in Jonglei State.
I am using past tense in this article with respect to levels of administration legally upheld by the Government of South Sudan presently. Juba works with state and administrative area authorities whose lines of duty extend to counties, payams, and bomas. The ‘Greaters,’ whether in Warrap or Jonglei, do not pose any constitutional significance. But I must admit, these have caused debates among their member communities. They are relevant in understanding past social organisations.
My argument is simple. The word ‘greater’ implies a geographic description. Pibor is a place, Ruweng is not. So we have ‘Greater Pibor’ and not the Greater Ruweng Administrative Area. Another startling example is Greater Tony. The three counties of Tony South, Tony East, and Tony North can best be collectively called Greater Tony. The authorities and people have accepted using Tony as a reference.
A different pattern is seen in Greater Gogrial, where Twic County (popularly known as Twic Mayardit) declined to be called Gogrial North County, besides Gogrial West and East counties. Still, both Gogrial and Tony’s names do not threaten any communal identity. This is why, most often, fewer debates surface here.
In Jonglei State, to be precise, the former three Greaters obey similar logic. That it only refers to the geographic description. Greater Akobo means Akobo town and its surrounding areas. It does not mean some mighty people in Jonglei call Akobo. The former Greater Fangak comprised both Nuer and Dinka of northern Jonglei. Greater Bor similarly means Bor as a place (Mading-Bor) and its surrounding areas.
Fangak, Akobo, and Bor, after which the former three Greaters of Jonglei were named, were all described as administrative headquarters, not ethnic identities of individual communities encompassed. So Greater Bor is not equivalent to Bor Dinka or Bor Community.
The former Greater Akobo or Akobo district included Anyuak. Greater Fangak had the Dinka groups of today’s Pigi, Gawaar Nuer, and Thiang Nuer (Phow). I can be corrected here. Greater Bor was entirely a territory of Dinka. You have been misinformed that they all make Dinka Bor.
No, it was an umbrella of Twic Dinka, Nyarweng Dinka, Hol Dinka, Bor Dinka and Thony Dinka. Just like Fangak and Akobo, the Bor in Greater Bor has so much to do with an administrative centre or headquarters than ethnic background.
Under district administrations, the former Bor district, headquartered in Bor, served Bor, Twic, Nyarweng, Hol, and Thony Dinka communities in Jonglei State. They were collectively the Dinka groups of the Bor district. So practically, areas surrounding and served by the then Mading-Bor (actually to this day) included Twic, Nyarweng, Bor, Thony & Hol villages.
The misunderstanding comes in when the phrase “Greater Bor” is shifted from a geographic description to an identity of people called Bor.
That would imply that everyone under Greater Bor is Bor. This is a misapplication, and people pushing this among our people must be humble enough to learn. The use of the word greater is clear. For people collectively called Bor, you cannot use greater. It can only make sense where non-Bor communities that are close to or are served by a place called Bor form part of such an administration.
Therefore, the communities of Twic Dinka, Nyarweng Dinka, Thony Dinka, and Hol Dinka can choose to be Bor, but history, logic, and simple language analysis dispute every bit of argument successfully.
The author, Dut James, is a concerned South Sudanese dental student at Cairo University, Egypt, and can be reached via his email: Dut James Garang djgadau@gmail.com or Facebook (Dut James).
If you want to submit an opinion article, commentary, or news analysis, please email it to the editor: info@paanluelwel.com or paanluel2011@gmail.com. PaanLuel Wël Media (PW) website does reserve the right to edit or reject material before publication. Please include your full name, a short biography, email address, city, and the country you are writing from.
About Post Author
