SPLM at a Crossroads: The Political Fallout of Sacking Gen. Kuol Manyang Juuk, Gen. James Wani Igga, and Gen. Daniel Awet Akot

By Daniel Abuoi Jook Alith | Sydney, Australia

Friday, 23 May 2025 (PW) — The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), once the vanguard of South Sudan’s hard-won independence, now finds itself embroiled in a crisis that strikes at the heart of its identity and legitimacy. The recent and abrupt dismissal of three of its most distinguished founding figures, General Kuol Manyang Juuk, Vice President James Wani Igga, and General Daniel Awet Akot, has not only shocked the political and military elite but has also raised grave concerns about the party’s future. With these removals executed unilaterally by President Salva Kiir Mayardit, bypassing the party’s established constitutional structures, many observers are questioning whether the SPLM is on a path to strategic consolidation or headed toward fragmentation and decline.

These men are not minor functionaries. They are foundational architects of the SPLM/A movement, whose careers span decades of both the liberation struggle and post-independence governance. First is Gen. Kuol Manyang Juuk, a revered military strategist, was among the “Original Commanders” who stood beside Dr. John Garang during the SPLM/A’s formative years. He later served with distinction as Minister of Defence and Governor of Jonglei, where he was lauded for stabilizing the volatile region.

Second is Dr. James Wani Igga, a prominent figure from Central Equatoria, brought political acumen and regional representation to the SPLM. As Speaker of the National Legislative Assembly and later Vice President, he served as a crucial bridge across South Sudan’s ethnic and political divides. The third is Gen. Daniel Awet Akot, a senior military commander from Lakes State, transitioned to legislative leadership after the war, lending credibility and moral authority to the SPLM during turbulent times.

Their removal is more than an administrative reshuffle, it symbolizes a severance from the SPLM’s historical and moral foundation, destabilizing the party’s internal equilibrium.

Skipping Party Structures: A Case of Presidential Overreach

The manner of these dismissals is especially troubling. Reliable sources confirm that President Kiir acted without consulting the SPLM’s Political Bureau, National Liberation Council, or General Secretariat. This move represents a blatant violation of the party’s constitution, which mandates collective leadership and participatory decision-making.

This isn’t an isolated incident. Over the past decade, the president has increasingly centralized power, transforming SPLM’s institutions into ceremonial bodies that merely ratify top-down decisions. Such centralization mirrors authoritarian tendencies observed in other post-liberation regimes, where personal loyalty and patronage networks supplant democratic deliberation.

This erosion of institutional governance demoralizes party cadres, delegitimizes internal processes, and undermines the SPLM’s promise as a people-led movement.

South Sudan now appears to be following a path trodden by many post-liberation African states, where institutional governance is displaced by personality-centered rule. Much like ZANU-PF under Robert Mugabe or Uganda’s NRM under Yoweri Museveni, the SPLM risks becoming a personal vehicle for one man’s continued dominance rather than a platform for inclusive governance and national renewal.

By dismissing these veterans, President Kiir seems to suggest that personal loyalty is now more valuable than historical legitimacy or institutional experience. While this may temporarily consolidate power, it risks alienating key constituencies: the military establishment, where Kuol and Awet are still deeply respected; Central Equatoria, where Wani Igga remains a revered leader, and Bahr el Ghazal, Kiir’s traditional support base, now shaken by Awet’s exclusion.

The Succession Question: Implications for National Unity and Peacebuilding

Perhaps the most ominous consequence of these dismissals is the vacuum they create in the party’s succession planning. President Kiir has long resisted naming a successor, maintaining deliberate ambiguity while sidelining potential contenders. The removal of Kuol, Wani, and Awet, each with the stature and experience to lead, deepens this crisis.

No remaining figure within the SPLM today commands a similar blend of historical legitimacy, cross-regional respect, and political experience. This absence of a credible successor exposes the SPLM to the risk of a destabilizing power struggle in the event of an unexpected leadership transition, echoing the violent schisms of 2013 and 2016.

The SPLM once symbolized unity during South Sudan’s darkest hours. Yet the current trajectory suggests fragmentation along familiar lines, ethnic, regional, and generational. We have already witnessed major breakaways: The SPLM-In-Opposition (SPLM-IO) under Riek Machar in 2013, and the SPLM-Former Detainees (SPLM-FDs), advocating reform and internal democracy.

Now, a new rift may be forming between the sidelined old guard and a rising elite loyal to Kiir. If disaffected veterans rally their constituencies or align with disillusioned factions, the SPLM could fracture even further, particularly ahead of the crucial 2026 elections.

President Kiir may believe these moves are necessary to purge dissent and ensure cohesion before elections. But this could prove to be a grave miscalculation. Without electoral reforms and credible leadership, the SPLM risks staging a hollow contest devoid of legitimacy. The absence of trusted veterans could further alienate an electorate already disillusioned by years of unfulfilled promises, violence, and economic hardship.

This power play unfolds against the backdrop of a fragile peace process and a society in deep trauma. The SPLM’s actions reverberate beyond party politics, they threaten the integrity of the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS).

Without inclusivity and institutional strength, core pillars of peace, disarmament, transitional justice, and constitutional reform, are imperiled. The dismissal of key veterans thus risks undoing hard-won gains toward reconciliation and stability.

Conclusion: A Party at Risk of Losing Its Soul

The unceremonious removal of Kuol Manyang Juuk, James Wani Igga, and Daniel Awet Akot marks a critical inflection point. It exposes the widening gap between the SPLM’s founding ideals and its current authoritarian drift. South Sudan’s ruling party now stands at a historic crossroads.

It can choose to rebuild its institutional integrity and embrace inclusive leadership or continue down a perilous road of personal rule and elite exclusion.

The stakes are enormous not only for the SPLM but for the future of South Sudan itself. At its best, the SPLM was the custodian of national aspiration. Unless it returns to those roots, it may well become another cautionary tale of a liberation movement that lost its way.

Daniel Abuoi Jook Alith holds a Bachelor of Social Science and a Master of Urban Management and Planning from Western Sydney University. He can be reached at dejook025@gmail.com.

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