Posts Tagged ‘john garang’

The Genius of Dr. John Garang: Letters and Radio Messages of the Late SPLM/A's Leader, Dr. John Garang de Mabioor (Volume 2) Paperback – November 27, 2013

The Genius of Dr. John Garang: Letters and Radio Messages of the Late SPLM/A’s Leader, Dr. John Garang de Mabioor (Volume 2) Paperback – November 27, 2013, ON AMAZON.COM

The Genius of Dr. John Garang: Letters and Radio Messages of the Late SPLM/A’s Leader, Dr. John Garang de Mabioor (Volume 2) Paperback – November 27, 2013, ON AMAZON.COM






Southern Sudan

February 5th, 1972 

Dear Dominic:

Thank you for the correspondence you dispatched to this end on January 25th, instantly. Very lucky, I go them today from Kampala through the lorry. It is lucky because I am leaving tomorrow morning for the interior, about 500 miles footwork from where we last met and I will not be back for over 7 months, maybe more.

Find here enclosed a copy of a letter I wrote to General Lagu and the negotiations committee (See Captain John Garang’s 1972 Letter to General Joseph Lagu of Anyanya One, January 24, 1972). I have handwritten it (it is 2:00 a.m) since I have packed my typewriter for tomorrow’s long journey. You may type it and if necessary you have my permission to use it BUT AFTER the negotiations ONLY so as not to prejudice the same. As you can see I am not in favor of these so-called negotiations nor do I have any illusions that much will come out of them. What is more, a settlement with the enemy at the present time is not in the best interests of the Southern Sudanese people, the Sudanese people and the African people for some of the reasons given in the attached seven page letter (refer to Captain John Garang’s 1972 Letter to General Joseph Lagu of Anyanya One, January 24, 1972).

Firstly, the “solution” will be no solution since the Arab military dictatorship of General Numeiry seeks to “solve” the problem within the spirit of Arab Nationalism and the context of a United Arab Sudan. Secondly, the Numeiry regime is illegitimate, a regime of blood, rhetoric, instability and theft, it is only a matter of months before the Numeiry clique is couped out of office by a similar scum of political prostitutes. To sign a “settlement” with such unstable barbarians is criminal and makes one a member of that gang though in a different outfit. Thirdly, the conditions for permanent revolution have not as yet been sufficiently created within our own motion.

The objective of liberation (of armed struggle) is firstly the riddance of oppression and exploitation and the simultaneous creation of conditions and structures for the permanent (continuous) release of our productive forces, which have been so historically damned, deformed, stunted and impeded by exploitation, oppression and humiliation. This last point is central as it focuses on the essence, the particularity of our movement.

About my role as Information Officer for the Anyanya, it is true that there has been such talk, but after I finished my infantry training last October, I made a concrete analysis of the situation and objective factors indicated that I could not make my total contribution in that capacity. You know what I mean. And if that be the case, it would be an intolerable situation. I joined the Movement with total commitment and dedication. I have sacrificed (I don’t consider it so) all the benefits paper dehumanizing education is supposed to confer on the dehumanized, decultured native holder, I am resolved to give the ultimate sacrifice, my life, for I am bound by nothing else but duty and commitment to Africa and the African people starting with the Southern Sudanese people, as a matter of course. African liberation can only primarily be effected through combat and everything else must be built around the combat, must enhance and give political character to combat. 

The Genius of Dr. John Garang: (Volume 1)

It would take me a book to go into analytical, historical and practical exposition of this line, but it is sufficient to say that this is why I turned down the “Information” work and chose active combat, and so tomorrow I go to the interior to (eventually soon) take over command of a full battalion. War is war, should anything terminate my usefulness (services) to the African people and revolution, it is incumbent upon you to continue with the struggle and/or to prepare the children and generations to come for the revolution. It is our duty.

I am indeed sorry about brother Vuzi Zulu that he comes at a time I have to leave. It would have been my duty and pleasure to cooperate with him since I presume we are engaged in the same revolution. (I would have also found that out). At any rate, pass my regards and explanation to him on his return. Some other time we shall meet.

Yes, I shot all the five colored films you gave me. After the training I went to Kampala but failed to develop them, as they don’t have facilities for developing Ecktochrome film in Kampala. When Allen Reed came he took them to Nairobi and they were developed and printed on slides. He then returned them and gave me a bill of 80/= (eighty Uganda shillings) which I promptly paid and I got all the slides. Two days later he came to me in Bumbo (twenty miles from Kampala) and begged me to borrow him some of the slides to teach his (Southern Sudanese) photography cadets who were there assembled in Kampala and that he would return them the following day.

He went and disappeared, till now I have not seen him—a complete breach of trust. Please convey the charge of theft to him from me, and collect those slides from him, I had actually told him that I was going to send them to you. The balance, I have left them locked up in Bumbo as I could not send them in time expecting Allen to return the borrowed ones and then send them in lump. This concurs with your other remarks.

Also please convey my sincere appreciation to FOPANO, ANAM, and OFPA for their endorsement “in principle” to cooperation with you and the Movement in our “efforts towards the liberation of Africa” and to Roy Inis and Core for the inclusion of “the Southern Sudanese Liberation Movement” in its support of African Liberation Movements.

Tell those citizens of Africa, snatched away from the great BLACK womb of our Mother, that time has come for their consciousness and ours on the mainland to merge (again) with one big black consciousness that will pull Mother Africa from the bloody teeth of the monster and usher in the total release of our productive forces long damned, deformed and impeded by centuries of oppression, exploitation and emasculating humiliation.

Greetings to all our students and brothers.

Brother Garang Mabior Atem

Southern Sudan, February 5th, 1972

Politically Poor Bor Politicians

Posted: April 23, 2012 by Tears Ayuen in Junub Sudan, Opinion Articles, Tearz Ayuen
Tags: , ,

English people proverbially say “one thing leads to another”, an idiom that means an event or activity results in another that you have usually not planned. Well, a story which was ran by Sudan Tribune website featuring a photo of a Bor child wearing an innocent face, intentionally stained with ash to keep off flies, published on March 26 under the name of “Jonglei citizens critical of lack of basic services” caused me to write out this article, not because it is the first story that reveals the political barrenness and questionability of the way the affairs of Bor people are being executed by those they elected to power, but because the photo, just the photo, touched the humanitarian me.

Yes I always speak my mind through writing but never before had I ever thought of publicizing what I feel about Bor and its leaders until I saw that face that seems to ask a million dollar question. The child’s face poses unspoken question, “do you really represent me, Honorable?” The question goes out to you, Bor Commissioner, Honorable Maker Lual, and all the members of parliament from Bor; Honorable Thon Nyok, Honorable June Maler, Honorable Makuei Lueth, Honorable Benjamin Malek Alier and Honorable Dengtiel Ayuen Kur. I’m going to leave Governor Kuol alone because he represents all of the six counties of Jonglei. All the incompetence and inefficiencies and failures witnessed by his commissioners and many other government officials knock at his door though. My targets are those directly managing Bor issues.

Before I register my protest fully, I would love you to know that there’s nothing personal about this opinion. I respect you as my parliamentarian and Bor political leader in general. You are a great man with amazing historical background. You have great children, some with whom I studied with in high school. Besides, I currently have no one on my mind; someone that can do better than you do.

I have been to Bor a couple of times and I managed to study it just by looking at the people and things. However, the following issues manifested through each age set are based on my observations and daily happenings. They point toward the road Bor as a society is headed…….a road leading to nowhere, I guess.

A Bor old man no longer stays in his Luak because a Luak that doesn’t house a few heads of cattle is useless; it’s like a body without soul. It’s worth vacating. His animals have been driven away by unidentified gunmen that he believes came from Pibor. He fears keeping the remaining three cows in his Luak for fear of being re-attacked and slaughtered by the unknown gunmen. So, where is he? He moved to his half-literate brother’s place in Bor town. The brother is a businessman. Life is still hard here. The old man eats once a day. A meal that does not comprise milk and meat weakens his bones. It fast-forwards his life span. He looks physically weak, with wasted muscles. He wears tattered clothes. He walks barefoot, with support of a staff. He can’t wear the boots his nephew abroad bought him in 2007 because they are not his size. Actually, they are his size but they just can’t fit him. Thanks to his toes. For some physiological conditions, the toes have grown apart, with the second toe pointing the sky and the fifth, freely relaxing at an angle of 180 degrees. He tries to keep himself happy and cheerful by drinking the infamous locally distilled alcohol known as “arege.” This helps him drink away all the worries of the new life, as he awaits the day he will exit to the new world.

The same with a grandmother; gone are days she used to grow groundnuts, sesame and tobacco at the backyard. Her old empty granaries are leaning. There’s nothing to store in it anyway. She can’t remember the last time she brewed beer for village men who helped cultivate her sorghum and maize plantations. Her only cows, the source of livelihood got attacked by Yellow Coast Fever and died. She doesn’t know what happened to her goats and sheep but something tells her that her goats got stolen by rogue villagers who capitalized on her conditions. They must have been butchered and sold to Bor city residents. As a result, she now stays in a small hut at her daughter’s home in Bor town.

An educated Bor gentleman lives and works in Bor. He is a teacher, married with three children. In addition to his immediate family members, his relatives; aunt, uncle, nieces, nephews and grandparents depend on him. Worst of all, the salary is such a joke, about a hundred dollars. It comes irregularly. It takes months, about three or so. One of the agendas he presents to God in his daily prayer is the salary, “God please let them pay us today”. When it finally comes, he does the Maths, long division to be specific. No savings; the salary goes from hand to mouth. He can’t think of furthering his studies because he is too pre-occupied with the lives of his dependents. Sadly, the dude is starving. His behind is so flat. You can’t locate where the buttocks used to be when he was a teenager!

A Bor boy of primary school-going age spends his day at the bus park in the city. He is a boda-boda. The motor cycle business he runs belongs to someone else, just a friend. He transports commuters within bor. In a successful business day, he makes about a hundred pounds. Out of that amount, the owner hands him twenty pounds which he takes home to his helpless ill mother. His younger brother is in the streets too, hustling. He sells newspapers that earn him a few pounds. Their friends are spoiled kids. They spend their day’s earnings on alcohol. I’m afraid, as time goes by and without any intervention, these little brothers will join their friends.

A Bor boy overseas, the one you believe undoubtedly emigrated with the sole aim of acquiring better education in foreign land has turned out to be something else. He is locally referred to as “niga”. He is chasing untold goals. One of the goals is called “swag”. I don’t know what it means but that’s what he daydreams about. He wears skinny jeans as if he is going to sing Michael Jackson’s Billie Jean track. He is in love with girls and clothes, expensive wears. He dresses to impress. He drinks too. If you, by whatever means, open up his head, you would find three words embedded in his brain, only three words. They are; girls, swag and alcohol. Nothing more! And his cousin seems to be on campus forever. He joined university six years ago but he still shows no sign of graduating. I can’t tell what exactly is going on.

A Bor girl abroad is the worst. She is in love with her body. She changes her tops more than she changes her underwear. Guess why? Just to spend hours in the toilet, taking pictures of herself! That’s what she does both at home and school, all day all night. The photos are usually pornographic, as her big balloon-like ass sticks out. Some images show her teats. At times, she cheats herself by pretending to be a super model. You should watch her walk. She goes to school to show off her beauty, just beauty. I hacked into her school account the other day. She performs poorly at school. In fact, she doesn’t go to school. She also drinks that poisonous European whiskey called Johnny Walker. What a missy!

And to be fair and true to myself and Bor society, I Tears Ayuen, the author of this piece, have to say one or two things about me. I am an alcoholic. You can just call me bar fly. I drink like a fish, every day. I am typing this sentence with difficulty. Alcohol has taken control over my fingers. They tremble. Never count on me!

The above descriptions paint a picture of what contemporary Bor society looks like. They also indicate what Bor will be like in few years to come should you, an MP, refuse to be guided by the oath you took during your swearing-in ceremony.

So, seven years after a strong government system was established, and a Bor baby is still smeared with cow dung to protect it from being bullyingly celebrated by houseflies, tsetse flies? OMG!

As you lie in your bed sometimes alone, do you cerebrate?

Does the word Bor ever cross your mind?

Considering life challenges each and every Bor is currently facing, in whose eyes do you see the future of Bor as a people? Ain’t it that baby’s? So, what’s up? What must you do to protect it? Do you need to google how to better his life?

For how long will Bor people drink water straight from frog ponds? Even when the other South Sudanese middle-aged men are proudly developing pot-bellies as a result of Comprehensive Peace Agreement, Bor men still have flat stomachs. In case you spot a Bor male adult with a big belly in Bor town, he must be suffering from bilharzia or tapeworm. The dude still drinks dirty water!!!

And by the way, why is Bor society being uprooted under your watch? Bor people are ever insecure. They are hunted by their neighbors for their livestock and you just watch, hoping that everything will be okay. Now that Bor is under attack; it’s being indirectly uprooted – the elderly folks are abandoning their villages due to preventable and avoidable insecurities, no one farms anymore and all the Luaks and huts have collapsed and no new huts are seen,  isn’t it the beginning of the complete uprooting of the whole Bor civilization? No one sings or dances any more. Celebratory drum beats are rarely heard today because there is nothing to celebrate about. Cows are gone. A Bor dies in cold blood every day; either while traveling on Bor-Juba road or at his Luak. If women are not ululating with sorrow in Kolnyang or Anyidi today, others are ululating in Baidit or Makuach. Now that the culture is gone, do you now have the privileges to reprimand me for wearing my pants below the waist? What culture would you cite?

Why is it that only mere individuals like Mathiang Kuc and Kok Alat plus many more others I haven’t heard of, have Bor at heart? I guess you know what I am talking about. These dudes dig deep into their pockets and spend their hard-earned cash on things that they believe will elevate Bor community. Why only them?

I am not suggesting that you are not doing anything at all but the current Bor situation tells it all. The general situation is so pathetic. It nullifies any little effort that you make or might have made.

I will leave it there. My fingers are uncontrollably shaking now. They are indirectly telling me to take another dose of alcohol. And remember, he who rebukes you loves you. I am off to drink.

Biography for Salva Kiir

First Name: Salva
Last Name: Kiir
Title: President
Country: South Sudan

  • 2 August 2005:Nominated John Garang‘s successor as Vice President following Garang‘s sudden death
  • Involved in the early stages of negotiating the peace deal – which ended 21 years of civil war
  • Previously deputy leader of the SPLM to John Garang
  • 1983: Became founder member of SPLM
  • 1972: Joined the sudanese army, after peace deal with President Jaafar Numeiri
  • 1960s: First joined southern Sudan rebels

Modest leader lights the path to freedom for Southern Sudanese

By Otieno Onyango

President Salva Kiir Mayardit has lived through the South Sudan liberation struggle to see the independence of the country as the 54th African state.

Like the former president of Southern Sudan, the late John Garang, Kiir known for his trademark fedora hat, is a Dinka. However, unlike the man he succeeded at the highest office in South Sudan, Kiir has no personality cult, although he is popular with the citizenry.

Dr Garang who died in a helicopter crash on July 30 2005 after leading the South to a peace agreement with the North was exceptionally charismatic and brooked no opposition. Salva Kiir on the other hand, has been described by many as modest and self-effacing.

But Kiir is the man who has overseen the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) signed between South and North Sudan in 2005, barely a year after Dr Garang had signed the agreement.

When Garang died, many pessimists questioned Kiir’s credentials to steward the country through the various stages of the peace agreement, saying that he lacked appropriate qualities like those of his predecessor, who was seen as an intellectual, visionary politician, etc.

Kiir, known for his modesty at that time, admitted that his feet were not big enough to fit into his predecessor’s shoes. He said Garang had been built over a long period of time to become what he was at the time of his death and appealed to Southerners to build him too so that he could measure up to Garang’s experience.

Kiir’s inexperience was indeed manifested in the way he handled initial negotiations with Khartoum’s National Congress Party (NCP), in which he lost key ministerial posts that were supposed to go to SPLM in accordance with the SPLM.

Today, as the Southern Sudanese celebrate independence, one thing stands out clear: Kiir has steadily been built to claim a prime page in the history books of South Sudan as the man who led the country to independence.

There was no doubt that Kiir was determined to see an independent South Sudan when in 2009, he said: “The upcoming referendum is a choice between being a second-class in your own country or a free person in your independent state.”

His bold statement was further reinforced during the last elections in April 2010 when he decided not to contest the presidency of Sudan, but that of South Sudan. This was a definite indication that he was no longer interested in a united Sudan. He was elected as the South Sudan president with an overwhelming 93 percent of the votes cast.

Kiir’s career path started by a brief enrollment in a formal school but before he could get anywhere with his education the country was at a war and he dropped to join the Anya-Anya rebellion movement so as to fight the war. That time marked Kiir’s career of being a soldier.

After being in the Anya-Anya movement, Kiir was absorbed into the Sudanese Armed Forces after the Addis Ababa Peace Agreement of 1972. He was able to rise in rank as far as being a junior officer in the branch of military security service within the Sudanese Armed Forces.

In 1983, when the late Garang joined an army mutiny, he had been sent to put down, Kiir and other Southern leaders joined the rebel Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) in the Second Civil War.

At that time, Garang had little military field experience and relied upon the more experienced Anya-Anya veterans, including Kiir, to actually carry out the ground war. Kiir eventually rose to head the SPLA’s military wing.

Kiir was popular among the military wing of the SPLM for his battlefield victories; just the same way he became popular among the populace for his unambiguous pro-secession stance.

An attempt to remove him from his post as SPLA chief of staff in 2004 nearly caused the organisation to split.

Kiir who became an important member of Garang’s inner advisers was involved in the early stages of negotiating the 2005 peace deal, which ended 21 years of civil war.

After signing of the CPA formally ending the war in January 2005, which he had helped start, Kiir was appointed Vice President of Southern Sudan. After the death of Garang in the helicopter crash of July 30, 2005, he was chosen to be the First Vice President of Sudan and President of Southern Sudan.

In his efforts to ensure South Sudan becomes independent, Kiir has been supported by his Vice President Dr Riek Machar who was one of the earliest members of the SPLM/A.

Dr Machar, however, split from SPLA/M in 1991 with Lam Akol and Gordon Kong Chuol to form SPLA-Nasir (1991–1993), later SPLA-United (1993–94) following his dissatisfaction with the leadership of the late Garang.

But he later joined Kiir after Garang’s death and helped in the implementation of the CPA until the Government of South Sudan went for the referendum in January 2011 – when the people decided their destiny to separate from the Khartoum.

As champagne bottles are popped to celebrate the new status of South Sudan, all eyes will be turning to both Kiir and his deputy Machar as the men who will actualize the liberation that Southerners have struggled for, for so long.

Salva Kiir skillfully midwifes a divorce

By Darf Alum Mabior

When President Salva Kiir took over as head of semi-autonomous government in 2005 after the tragic death of civil war hero John Garang, many compared him unfavourably with his maverick, dashing predecessor.

The assessment was based on the fact that Salva Kiir is reputed as a man of few words in the runaway Sudanese politics. What is emerging now is that the picture he effuses as a political neophyte may not be all that correct.

In fact he is a wily political fox who has managed to steer Southern Sudan into safer waters on many occasions, the most memorable being last January’s referendum that many had predicted would plunge the country into civil war.

Kiir the president of Southern Sudan, forever sporting cowboy hats and backed by a small team of capable deputies, has spent the past five years locking horns with the region’s old enemies in Khartoum, laying the groundwork for most Southerners’ long dream of independence that comes to fruition this Saturday July 9.

When North and South Sudan ended decades of civil war following the signing of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), both sides officially agreed to campaign to persuade Southerners to stay united with the north. But it was an open secret that Kiir, and the vast majority of Southerners, had their heart set on a political divorce.

The build-up to that split this weekend has been bloody and disastrous. Thousands of people have died inside Southern Sudan over the past two years – in “tribal” clashes. The South insists northern-backed militias provoked the violence, but Khartoum strenuously denies the accusation.

Sudan’s northern and southern-backed armies are also still facing off in flashpoints along their ill-defined common border – including in the oil-rich northern region of Southern Kordofan and the contested Abyei area.

But compared to the bloodshed Sudan has seen over past decades, the fact that Southern Sudan has got this close to independent is in part due to Kiir’s unassuming, consensus-building skills, analysts say.

But Kiir, the former head of the military wing of the South’s dominant Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), has concentrated on keeping his fragmented region united.

He has repeatedly offered amnesties and pardons to a rash of renegade militia leaders who have sprung up over the past year.

During north-south confrontations over Abyei and other hotspots, Kiir was quick to say he had no intention of going back to war, welcome news to the United States and others in the West that shepherded the peace deal through.

Kiir, a regular worshipper at Juba’s Catholic cathedral, has been good at bringing old foes into the SPLM and the Southern army. But worries remain about the ability of his party to accept rivals who insist on staying outside the fold.

International observers accused the SPLM and southern army officers of intimidation of opposition groups during last year’s national elections.

Southern journalists have also complained about harassment, particularly when articles tackle corruption or some of the South’s more eccentric development projects.

So far Kiir, in his late 50s, has kept himself insulated from accusations made against more confrontational supporters.

His quiet approach and lack of polarising rhetoric could now be his main strengths in governing a landlocked territory handicapped by tribal divisions, severe poverty, unstable neighbours and huge supplies of privately held weapons.



BBC Article Profiling Salva Kiir Monday, August 26, 2010 UK

From a military leader, to a respected statesman.
Salva Kiir Mayardit looks set to be the man who leads Southern Sudan to independence in 2011.This somewhat reluctant politician realised he had little chance of being elected national president in the April 2010 election.So he chose instead to seek a democratic mandate as leader of Southern Sudan – a position he has held since the sudden death of his charismatic predecessor, John Garang, in 2005.Now that he has been elected, he is favourite to become the first president of Africa’s newest country in 2011 – no doubt still wearing his trademark cowboy hat.Although he has been national vice-president for five years, he has spent most of his time in the south – which some say indicates that independence was always his goal.In 2009, he made his feelings clear, saying: “The upcoming referendum is a choice between being a second-class in your own country, or a free person in your independent state.”Inner circleLike many of his fellow southerners, he voted for the first time in 2010.With 12 separate contests, he was not alone in making a mistake, putting one of the ballot papers into the wrong box.

Dr. John Garand de Mabior

Mr Kiir took over as southern leader and national deputy leader after Garang died in a helicopter crash in August 2005 – just three weeks after he had been sworn in as vice-president.

This sparked rioting by southerners in the north, who thought Garang had been been killed.

However, an official investigation showed the death was an accident and Mr Kiir has been able to ride out the storm, while steering the south towards the independence he has long cherished – far more so than Garang, who had advocated unity.

Mr Kiir is not a natural public speaker and had always been in Garang’s shadow.

But he was an important member of his inner circle and was military leader of the southern rebel group, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM).

He was involved in the early stages of negotiating the 2005 peace deal – which ended 21 years of civil war – and was already well-known to the government in Khartoum before becoming national vice-president as part of the deal.

Mr Kiir joined the southern rebellion in Sudan in the late 1960s.

By the time President Jaafar Numeiri made peace with the rebels in 1972, Mr Kiir had risen to become a low-ranking officer. With the accord in place he joined the Sudanese army.

SALVA KIIR1960s: First joined southern Sudan rebels1983: Became founder member of SPLM1990s: SPLM military leader2005: Nominated John Garang’s successor following his sudden death – national vice-president and southern president2010: Elected southern president

In 1983 the southern rebellion was renewed and Garang was sent to quell a mutiny by troops in the south – but instead of putting down the mutineers, he joined them.

Mr Kiir was, with Garang, one of the founders of the SPLM, and rose to lead its military wing.

Unlike his predecessor, Mr Kiir is not an intellectual and is said to be easily bored in long speeches.

Mr Kiir is from the same Dinka community as Garang, although the two are from different clans.

Given that the Dinka are the biggest ethnic group in Southern Sudan, Mr Kiir should enjoy widespread support in the region.

He is very popular among the SPLM’s military wing, says Gill Lusk, editor of Africa Confidential magazine.

Most of their successes in the field are attributed directly to Mr Kiir, who controlled the movement’s army.

An attempt to remove Mr Kiir as the movement’s army chief of staff almost caused a split in the SPLM in 2004. The trouble was averted only when Garang dropped the idea.

As a former rebel movement, Mr Kiir’s SPLM is still to show that it is ready to accept dissent.

The elections in the south were marred by widespread allegations of intimidation of those challenging official SPLM candidates.

This raises fears that “New Sudan”, as it is sometimes called, may not be any more democratic than the old version.


Who is Salva Kiir?

Salva Kiir may be best known for his cowboy hat and for his landslide victory in April 2010 as president of Southern Sudan. He may soon celebrate his country’s independence from the North. As the referendum process reaches its completion, Kiir’s confidence has hugely increased, say observers. A vote for secession by the Southern Sudanese from the North is said to be expected.

Kiir, born in 1951, has said in the past that “the upcoming referendum is a choice between being a second class in your own country, or a free person in your independent state.” The south’s population mostly follow Christianity or traditional religions, while the north has a Muslim majority. Kiir, 60, is a Catholic.

“President Salva Kiir Mayardit is popular but he has no personality cult, unlike his late predecessor, Colonel John Garang de Mabior,” says Gill Lusk, associate editor at Africa Confidential

Africa confidential magazine. “Dr. Garang was exceptionally charismatic and brooked no opposition. Salva Kiir is seen as modest and self-effacing, which appeals to many Southerners, especially those who resent the domination of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army by people from the Dinka ethnic group.

The result of the referendum is widely expected to be a vote for secession, and the creation of a new African nation that could be born as early as July and Juba is the probable capital of a nation with fertile soil and oil, and potentially a bright future.

A graduate of the Sudan Military College, Kiir has led the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) as Commander-in-Chief that in 1983 he helped found. After Garang’s death in July 2005 in a helicopter crash, Kiir became the President of Southern Sudan and, by default, First Vice-President of Sudan and formed a government that incorporated many of the movement’s former opponents and rival factions. He was then elected, with 93% of the vote, President of Southern Sudan in April 2010.

“He has long had a reputation as a conciliator, both within the SPLM/A and among Southern ethnic groups, particularly for quarrels between Nuer and Dinka clans,” Lusk said.

He was a boy when he joined Anya Nya, the rebel movement of the post-Independence North-South war (1955-72). He was absorbed into the Sudan Armed Forces following the Addis Ababa accord which ended that conflict, and rose to lieutenant colonel that was uncommonly senior for an ex-rebel, and led military intelligence in Upper Nile, according to an article in Africa Confidential.

He worked and fought in different regions of the country, hence learning “the South’s ethnic and regional complexities,” said the article. By 1988, he was Garang’s de facto number two.

London-based research and educational NGO Rift Valley Institute Executive Director John Ryle says “if anyone can unite the south, it is Salva Kiir.” He had to respond by e-mail from Juba after phone lines kept breaking. In describing Kiir he writes, “he is genial and quiet-spoken, but can be eloquent as a public speaker, and in more than one language.”

Ali Sheikholeslami
euronews correspondent in London

Copyright © 2011 euronews

From Wikipedia

Salva Kiir Mayardit (born 1951) is the first President of the Republic of South Sudan.

In the late 1960s, Kiir joined the Anyanya in the First Sudanese Civil War. By the time of the 1972 Addis Ababa Agreement, he was a low-ranking officer.[2] In 1983, when John Garang joined an army mutiny he had been sent to put down, Kiir and other Southern leaders joined the rebel Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) in the second civil war. Garang had little military field experience and relied upon the more experienced Anyanya veterans, including Kiir, to actually carry out the ground war.[3] Kiir eventually rose to head the SPLA, the SPLM’s military wing. An attempt to remove Kiir from his post as SPLA chief of staff in 2004 nearly caused the organization to split.[2]

Southern Sudanese politics

Following the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement formally ending the war in January 2005, which he had helped start, he was appointed Vice President of Southern Sudan. Perhaps significantly, former Southern Sudan president John Garang like Kiir is of the Dinka people, though of a different clan. After the death of Garang in a helicopter crash of 30 July 2005, Kiir was chosen to succeed to the post of First Vice President of Sudan and President of Southern Sudan. Kiir is popular among the military wing of the SPLM for his battlefield victories and among the populace for his unambiguous pro-secession stance.[2]

Comments by Kiir in October 2009 that the forthcoming independence referendum was a choice between being “a second class in your own country” or “a free person in your independent state” were expected to further strain political tensions.[4] Reports in January 2010 that Kiir would not contest April elections for Sudanese president, but would focus on re-election as president of Southern Sudan were interpreted to mean that the SPLM priority is independence.[5]

Kiir was re-elected with 93% of the vote in the 2010 Sudanese election. Although the vote on both the national and sub-national level was criticized by democratic activists and international observers, the overwhelming margin of Kiir’s re-election was noted by some media as being “Step One” in the process of secession.[6] Following his re-election, Omar al-Bashir reappointed Kiir as the First Vice President of Sudan in accordance with the interim constitution.[7]

President of South Sudan

Southern Sudanese voted overwhelmingly in favor of independence from Sudan in January 2011, with 98.83% of voters reportedly preferring to split from the North.[8] On 9 July 2011, South Sudan became an independent state, with Kiir as its first president. Kiir positioned himself as a reformer, using his inaugural address to call for the South Sudanese people “to forgive, though we shall not forget” perceived injustices at the hands of the northern Sudanese over the preceding decades[9] and announce a general amnesty for South Sudanese groups that had warred against the SPLM in the past.[10] A few weeks later, he publicly addressed members of the military and police to warn them that rape, torture, and other human rights violations carried out by armed personnel would be considered criminal acts and prosecuted aggressively by the Ministry of Justice.[11]

Kiir faced the first real crisis in his presidency of the Republic of South Sudan in early August 2011, when clashes over cattle erupted between Lou Nuer and Murle people in Jonglei and Warrap states, leaving over 600 dead. Kiir ordered the army to deploy to the unrest-hit areas to quell the violence, and the South Sudanese government claimed the next day that fighting had ended.[12]

In mid-October 2011, Kiir announced South Sudan had applied for accession to the East African Community. He declared the EAC to be “at the centre of our hearts” due to its members’ support of the South during the Sudanese civil wars.[13]

Salva Kiir Mayardit

Southern Sudanese Nationalist and First President of South Sudan

By , Guide

Salva Kiir Mayardit is set to become the first president of the Republic of South Sudan, veteran of the First and Second Sudanese Civil Wars, and a leading member of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement.

Date of Birth: c. 1951

Early Life
Very little is known about Salva Kiir despite his prominent position in Sudanese politics. It is believed he was born in 1951, one of the Dinka people who live along the Nile in what was then southern Sudan.

Civil War in The Sudan
Kiir became a member of the Anya Nya during the 1960s, the time of the First Sudanese Civil War. By the time the civil war ended under the 1972 Addis Ababa Agreement, and Southern Sudan was granted autonomy, Kiir was a junior officer.

In 1983 Sudanese President Jaafar Muhammad an-Numeiry broke the 1972 Agreement and sent his forces south to put down the resurgence of the Anya Nya. Many of the soldiers sent south mutinied. One officer in particular, John Garang had been part of the Anya Nya during the First Civil War and was now an army officer. He swapped sides and formed the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) from the remnants of the Anya Nya and the Sudanese soldiers who supported the south. Kiir was amongst those from the Anya Nya who joined the SPLA and he rose to eventually head the SPLM’s military wing.

Vice President Kiir
In 2002 Garang began peace talks with President Omar al-Hasan Ahmad al-Bashir. On 9 January 2005 the Sudanese National Islamic Front government, and various opposition groups including the SPLM signed a peace agreement. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) formally recognized the autonomy of southern Sudan and made way for an eventual referendum on independence. John Garang was made vice president of Sudan and president of the Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS). Salva Kiir Mayardit was made vice-president of Southern Sudan. When Garang died in a helicopter crash on 30 July 2005, Salva Kiir was made leader of the SPLM and became acting president of Southern Sudan. He was confirmed to the post on 11 August.

In 2010 Kiir decided to focus on independence for Southern Sudan rather than contest for the post of president of Sudan. He was re-elected as president of GOSS with a 93% majority. The re-elected president of Sudan, al-Bashir, once again selected Kiir as his vice-president.

Independence for South Sudan
A referendum on self-determination was held in southern Sudan between 9 and 15 January 2011. The result was a 98% vote for independence. On 9 July 2011 the Republic of South Sudan came into existence, with Salva Kiir Mayardit as its first president.

BBC Profile: Southern Sudan leader Salva Kiir

Salva Kiir campaigning in for Aril 2010 election
Salva Kiir Mayardit looks set to become the first president of Africa’s newest country in 2011 – no doubt still wearing his trademark cowboy hat.

The former rebel commander has guided his homeland of Southern Sudan through multiple challenges since a 2005 peace deal ended two decades of war with the north.

Since becoming the south’s leader later that year, much of his focus has been on ensuring the south’s referendum on full independence – the climax of that peace agreement – does take place.

As such, he has had to tread an often difficult line in negotiations with former enemies in the north.

Mr Kiir is also vice-president of all Sudan, but he has long supported full independence for the south.

In 2009, he made his feelings clear, saying: “The upcoming referendum is a choice between being a second-class in your own country, or a free person in your independent state.”

Garang’s shadow

His decision not to stand for national president in the April 2010 elections laid to rest any lingering doubts about whether he would back separation.

Salva Kiir

Map locator
  • 1960s: First joined southern rebellion
  • 1983: Founder member of SPLM
  • 1990s: SPLM military leader
  • 2005: Southern leader and national vice-president
  • 2010: Elected president of Southern Sudan

Instead, he chose to seek a democratic mandate as leader of Southern Sudan – a position he had already held since the sudden death of his charismatic predecessor, John Garang.

He won an overwhelming majority, with many south Sudanese saying there are few others able to take his place.

“President Kiir can hold us together – there is no-one else who can do that today,” trader Agnes Monoja told the BBC.

Mr Kiir took over as southern leader and national deputy leader after Garang died in a helicopter crash in August 2005 – just three weeks after he had been sworn in as vice-president.

This sparked rioting by southerners in Khartoum, who thought Garang had been killed by his long-time enemies in the north.

However, an official investigation showed the death was an accident and Mr Kiir has been able to ride out the storm, while steering the south towards the independence he has long cherished – far more so than Garang, who had advocated unity.

But the shadow of Garang still looms over his successor.

Mr Kiir was an important member of his inner circle and was military commander of the southern rebels, the Sudan Peoples’ Liberation Movement (SPLM).

He was involved in the early stages of negotiating the 2005 peace deal, which ended 21 years of civil war, and was already well-known to the government in Khartoum before becoming national vice-president.

Unlike his predecessor, Mr Kiir is not an intellectual.

But while he is not a natural public speaker, he does know how to work the crowds, and is greeted with cheers and popular affection when he speaks at rallies.

A committed Christian, Mr Kiir regularly speaks at the Roman Catholic cathedral in Juba, the southern capital.


Mr Kiir is believed to be 59 but even the SPLM could not confirm his age.

If, God forbid, he [Kiir] went, it would open old wounds between people, and there would be too many fierce arguments over who would replace him” Agnes Monoja Trader

He first joined the southern rebellion in the late 1960s.

By the time President Jaafar Numeiri made peace with the rebels in 1972, Mr Kiir had become a low-ranking officer. With the accord in place, he joined the Sudanese army.

In 1983 the southern rebellion was renewed and Garang was sent to quell a mutiny by troops in the south – but instead of putting down the mutineers, he joined them.

Mr Kiir was, with Garang, one of the founders of the SPLM, and rose to lead its military wing.

Like Garang, he comes from the Dinka community – the largest ethnic group in the south – although the two are from different clans.

He is also shrewd – he has to be.

It is an unenviable task to balance the rival and heavily armed ethnic groups in the vast and grossly underdeveloped swamps, jungles and grasslands of the south.

Some members of other groups, especially the Nuer, the second most numerous in the south, resent the perceived Dinka dominance.

The two groups sometimes battled each other during the civil war, as well as fighting together against northerners.

Ms Monoja fears that Mr Kiir is one of the few able to keep the south united.

John Garang (2000) Long-time SPLM leader John Garang died just three weeks after becoming vice-president

“If, God forbid, he went, it would open old wounds between people, and there would be too many fierce arguments over who would replace him,” she said.

And despite the oil riches of the south, development since the war ended has appeared slow to many people on the streets.

“Things have improved greatly since the war,” said Francis Jacob, an unemployed man. “But the government drives big cars and we still have not got jobs.”

For now, however, old civil war enemies in Khartoum provide a useful rallying point for southerners to unite behind Mr Kiir.

He is very popular among the SPLM’s military wing, says Gill Lusk, editor of Africa Confidential magazine.

Most of their successes in the field during the war were attributed directly to Mr Kiir, who controlled the movement’s army.

An attempt to remove Mr Kiir as the movement’s army chief of staff almost caused a split in the SPLM in 2004. The trouble was averted only when Garang dropped the idea.

As a former rebel movement, Mr Kiir’s SPLM is still to show that it is ready to accept dissent.

The elections in the south were marred by widespread allegations of intimidation of those challenging official SPLM candidates.

This raises fears that “New Sudan”, as it is sometimes called, under Mr Kiir may not be any more democratic than the old version.

Biography of Kiir Mayardit SALVA

Sudan > Politics : Kiir Mayardit SALVA

Kiir Mayardit SALVA
Click on a picture to enlarge

Born on 01/01/1951 (format : day/month/year)

Biography :

Salva Kiir Mayardit was born in Anglo-Egyptian Sudan in 1951.

He is currently head of state of, among others, Southern Sudan, Southern Sudan, Southern Sudan, Southern Sudan and Southern Sudan. His current occupation is politician.

On 2 August 2005, he was nominated John Garang’s successor as vice President of Sudan and his first task was to negotiate the peace deal which ended 21 years of civil war. Previously he was deputy leader of the SPLM. In 1983 he was a founder member of the SPLM.

He first joined the Southern Sudan rebels in the 1960’s, joining the Sudanese army in 1972 after a peace deal with the President Jaafar Numeiri. Kiir is a Dinka (Sudanese tribe). Kir is well known for always wearing a cowboy hat. In 1983, as an army officer, he was sent to put down a mutiny, which he ended up joining and he ended up helping found the SPLM (the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement).

An attempt to remove Kiir from his post as SPLA chief of staff in 2004 nearly caused the organization to split. He is well known for his heroic military achievements during the civil war. His comments have been well publicized, in 2009, about the aim of achieving an independent southern state, he said, “a second class in your own country” or “a free person in your independent state.”

From Guerilla Fighter to Independence Politician: The Story of South Sudan’s Salva Kiir Mayardit

With the January 9, 2011, referendum on South Sudanese independence only weeks away, a long-time rebel commander turned politician stands to become the first president of a new African nation with both abundant oil reserves and a highly uncertain future. Salva Kiir Mayardit, a Roman Catholic Rek Dinka from Warrap State in Bahr al-Ghazal Province, fought in both of Sudan’s civil wars, finishing the second as chief military commander of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/M). [1]


In 1967, a 17-year-old Salva Kiir joined the Anyanya Rebellion (1955-1972), an armed effort to establish a separate state in South Sudan. Following the 1972 Addis Ababa Agreement that brought an end to Sudan’s first civil war, Kiir was among those Anyanya guerillas who were integrated into the Sudanese Armed Forces, or the Wildlife Protection Service (many other irreconcilable fighters went south to Idi Amin’s Uganda). He graduated from the Sudan Military College in Omdurman and went on to serve as a major in Sudanese military intelligence.

Having joined the renewed Southern insurgency in 1983, Salva Kiir’s skills and influence were recognized when he was made a member of the SPLA/M High Command Council, alongside notable southern soldiers such as Colonel John Garang de Mabior (who emerged as the SPLA/M’s Chairman), Lieutenant Colonel Karabino Kuanyin Bol, Major Arok Thon Arok and Lieutenant Colonel William Nyuon Bany. Of these figures, only Salva Kiir survives today.

Kiir began to play an important political and diplomatic role in 1993 when he led the SPLM delegation to the Organization of African Unity-sponsored Sudan peace talks in Abuja, Nigeria. Kiir filled the role as John Garang’s deputy following the death of William Nyoun Bany in 1996. He again led the SPLM delegation to the initial Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD)-sponsored Sudan peace talks in Kenya’s Eastern Province that paved the way for the ground-breaking July 2002 Machakos Protocol. The Machakos Protocol was the first in a series of eight protocols that ultimately led to the Naivasha Agreement, formally known as the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), signed in Nairobi on January 9, 2005. The signing of the CPA in Nairobi set the stage for the 2011 referendum vote and for the equal distribution of oil revenues between North and South.

Increasing differences between Kiir and SPLA chairman John Garang in 2004 led to unsuccessful attempts by Garang to replace the popular military leader as commander-in-chief of the SPLA (Sudan Vision, July 8, 2005). There were, in turn, rumors that Kiir was planning to depose Garang and install veteran politician Bono Malwal in his place.
John Garang was Sudan’s foremost advocate of a united but democratic and federated Sudan that would incorporate the country’s highly diverse peoples into Sudan’s narrowly defined power structure, traditionally dominated by three Arab tribes of North Sudan. His particular vision of a “New Sudan” often placed him at odds with the rest of the SPLA/M leadership, many of whom advocated for an independent South Sudan. These divisions grew as the civil war showed few signs of ending and attitudes toward the North hardened. Garang became increasingly intolerant of internal challenges to his program and used force to maintain ideological discipline. However, Garang’s vision appears to have died with him in the helicopter crash that claimed his life in July 2005, only months after successfully negotiating the CPA that ended the civil war with Khartoum. Unlike the late Garang, Salva Kiir is a separatist who quickly steered the direction of the SPLM from an organization officially vouching for national unity into an independence movement. Kiir was girded with strong ground support with a dearth of vocal opposition for the shift.

The CPA established a Government of National Unity (GoNU) in Khartoum and a Government of South Sudan (GoSS) based in Juba, Central Equatoria State, with the GoSS president automatically becoming first vice-president of the Republic of Sudan. Since Garang’s death, Kiir has served as first vice-president of the Sudanese GoNU and president of the GoSS.  Kiir was not everyone’s choice as the movement’s new leader, but it was important to follow the established line of succession for the SPLA/M to maintain its international credibility as a partner in the CPA and prevent the movement from splintering. The result was a unanimous vote on the part of the SPLA/M High Command Council to elect Kiir as SPLM chairman and commander-in-chief of the SPLA. He was later reelected by unanimous vote in 2008.

Kiir is not known as a forceful speaker but has used other methods to establish his public presence. Like most Nilotic peoples of the region, Kiir is unusually tall by Western standards and cuts a distinctive look in his typical black suit, red tie and broad-brimmed black hat (the latter innovation has since been adopted by many of Darfur’s rebel leaders).

Disengaging from the New Sudan

It was widely expected that John Garang’s appointment to first vice-president of the Sudan under the terms of the CPA would mark the beginning of a new approach to the crisis in Darfur, but his death and the subsequent takeover by Salva Kiir as vice-president instead marked the beginning of a more muted approach by the SPLA/M to the Darfur crisis. The movement’s attempts to unite the fractious Darfur rebels have been largely unsuccessful and even the SPLA/M’s limited efforts to help forge a solution to the Darfur crisis have been discouraged by Khartoum. Sudan’s National Intelligence and Security Service (NISS) recently demanded that South Sudan arrest Darfur rebel leaders who are residing in the region governed by the GoSS (Sudan Tribune, November 8). Salva Kiir has, nonetheless, encouraged the unification of the many Darfur rebel movements, and his discussions with Dr. Khalil Ibrahim’s Justice and Equality Movement (JEM – the strongest rebel group in Darfur) have proved particularly worrisome for Khartoum.

With Kiir uninterested in the national presidency, the SPLM decided to run Yasir Sa’id Arman, a northerner and longtime member of the SPLM leadership, for the presidency in the April elections. However, Arman and the other leading challenger, former president and Umma Party leader Sadiq al-Mahdi, both decided to withdraw from the election citing irregularities. Following the withdrawal of the SPLM from the presidential contest, Kiir stunned many by saying he had voted to re-elect National Congress Party (NCP) chairman Omar al-Bashir as president of Sudan (Sudan Tribune, April 18).

Kiir has accused Khartoum of sending only 26% of Sudan’s oil revenues to the southern capital of Juba, rather than the 50% designated in the CPA (Sudan Tribune, October 1). Nearly 50% of the revenues that have reached Juba have gone to an ambitious rearmament program in the South intended to place the SPLA on a more even footing with the conventional forces of the SAF. Nascent efforts have even begun to create a South Sudan Air Force.

Pardoning Thy Enemies

Under the terms of the CPA, the SAF and the SPLA became the only legal armed groups in Sudan. The many independent or pro-Khartoum militias operating in the South were given the option of disarming or joining one of the legal armed forces. Naturally it became imperative for the SPLA/M to integrate these forces rather than allow pro-Khartoum armed groups to continue their existence in the South. The process, however, has been slow and even appeared to be failing in the last year as a number of SPLA commanders rebelled against Salva Kiir’s government in the aftermath of the April elections, which the dissidents complained were fixed in favor of Kiir loyalists.

In January 2006, Salva Kiir’s negotiations with longtime anti-SPLA militia commander Paulino Matip Nhial resulted in the traditionally pro-Khartoum Bul Nuer commander joining the SPLA/M. The so-called “Juba Declaration” incorporating “other armed groups” into the SPLA/M was a major coup for Kiir and an important step in convincing remaining Nuer and other tribal dissidents to cooperate with the SPLA/M in the lead-up to the referendum. Paulino Matip was rewarded by being made deputy commander of the SPLA, with promotion to full general in May 2009 (, May 31, 2009).

As Kiir began preparing South Sudan for the independence referendum (and the possible outbreak of hostilities following a yes vote for a separate state), a series of small rebellions and mutinies by SPLA/M generals and officers threatened to destroy any chance of a unified approach to the question of the Sudanese Republic’s formal bifurcation. Many saw the hand of Khartoum and its proven “divide and conquer” approach to any threat to central authority behind these rebellions. Though Kiir initially responded with force to these challenges, he ultimately turned to an amnesty in September 2010, which, combined with the seeming inevitability of a Southern vote for independence, succeeded in bringing nearly all the rebel commanders back into the fold. It was a bold gambit – before the decision, many Southerners were calling for the utter destruction of the mutinous commanders; after the decision, the families of loyal SPLA troops killed in combating the rebellions were outraged by such pardons (New Sudan Vision, October 11).

The main individuals concerned in the amnesty were the following:

• Lieutenant General George Athor:  George Athor, a Dinka tribesman, ran as an independent for governor of Jonglei State in the April elections after having failed to receive the nomination of the SPLM. Unhappy with his loss in the polls, Athor and his men began a series of heavy clashes with SPLA forces in late April through May. Athor threatened to take the Unity (Wilayah) State capital of Malakal while SPLM secretary general Pagan Amun accused him of being a pawn of al-Bashir’s NCP (Sudan Tribune, May 17; al-Hayat, May 14; see also Terrorism Monitor, May 20). Athor’s men are now reported to be rejoining SPLA forces in Jonglei under the command of Major General Peter Bol Kong (Sudan Tribune, November 9).

• Major General Gabriel Tang: Tang led a pro-government militia in the civil war. After clashing with the SPLA in 2006, Tang withdrew to Khartoum, where his forces were integrated with the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF). His unannounced return to Malakal in February 2009 led to further clashes with the SPLA that left hundreds dead before Tang returned to Khartoum (see Terrorism Monitor, March 13, 2009). Tang responded to the amnesty offer within days by flying to Juba and declaring his allegiance to the SPLA/M (Sudan Tribune, October 15).

• David Yau Yau: A civilian from Jonglei, David Yau Yau is a member of the Murle Tribe and is allied with George Athor. Yau launched a small rebellion in Jonglei’s Pibor County following his defeat in the April elections. He was not named in the September 29 pardons, but is expected to follow George Athor’s lead (Miraya FM [Juba], July 5; Small Arms Survey, November 2010).

• Colonel Gatluak Gai: A colonel in the Prisons Service of South Sudan, this relatively unknown Nuer officer led a short-lived rebellion in May-June against the SPLA/M in Unity State following allegations of vote rigging there in the April elections. Several sources reported Missiriya Arab fighters amongst Gai’s force. The colonel fled north after clashes with the SPLA and has not responded to offers of an amnesty (, November 18; Sudan Tribune, June 4;, June 30; Small Arms Survey, November 2010).

Preparing for the Referendum

Kiir’s decision not to contest the April 2010 Sudanese presidential elections in favor of running for president of the South Sudan was a clear sign that the SPLA/M was no longer a national movement. With little real opposition, Kiir returned to office with 93% of the vote. As president of the South Sudan, Kiir was automatically made vice-president of the national Sudanese government. In the byzantine realm of Sudanese politics, Dr. Riek Machar, a Nuer warlord who spent many years dedicated to the destruction of the SPLA/M, was made vice-president of the GoSS.

Salva Kiir’s statement to supporters in Juba that he intended to vote for outright independence because the North had failed to make unity attractive was condemned by NCP official Rabie Abdelati Obeid, who noted that the CPA “stated clearly that the SPLM with the National Congress Party should work together to achieve unity and to make unity attractive during the interim period…This is a clear violation of the CPA and it is against that agreement…” (Sudan Tribune, October 1; VOA, October 3).

After his return from recent meetings with UN and American officials, Kiir told a crowd in Juba: 

“Critically important is that the referenda take place on time, as stipulated in the CPA. Delay or denial of the right of self-determination for the people of Southern Sudan and Abyei risks dangerous instability.  There is without question a real risk of a return to violence on a massive scale if the referenda do not go ahead as scheduled… We are genuinely willing to negotiate with our brothers in the North, and are prepared to work in a spirit of partnership to create sustainable relations between northern and southern Sudan for the long-term.  It is in our interest to see that the North remains a viable state, just as it should be in the interests of the North to see Southern Sudan emerge a viable one too.  The North is our neighbor, it shares our history, and it hosts our brothers and sisters.  Moreover, I have reiterated several times in my speeches in the past that even if Southern Sudan separates from the North it will not shift to the Indian Ocean or to the Atlantic Coast!”(, October 4).

The most contentious issue Kiir must deal with is the future of Abyei, a disputed territory lying along the border of Kordofan (North) and Bahr al-Ghazal (South). A separate referendum to be held simultaneously with the independence vote will determine whether Abyei joins the North or the South. Most of the district’s Ngok Dinka peoples are expected to vote for unification with the South, but the nomadic Missiriya Arabs of South Kordofan who pasture their herds there demand to be included in the voting. So far this issue has not been resolved and there are few signs the referendum will take place on time. Khartoum has said a postponement is necessary and Missiriya anger is threatening to create new violence in the already war-ravaged territory. Kiir has promised an SPLM government can provide services to the Missiriya, but cannot hand over the land to Missiriya control (Miriya FM [Juba], November 17). SPLM officials now speak of annexing Abyei if a referendum cannot be held, but only after making significant financial concessions to Khartoum.

Kiir has promised the nomadic Missiriya Arabs that they will continue to be allowed to graze their animals in an independent South Sudan: “Even if they come up to Juba, nobody will stop them” (Sudan Tribune, October 1). However, Kiir may find it difficult to back up such a promise under new attitudes to the presence of Arab nomads in an independent South Sudan. Many southerners harbor memories of the Missiriya’s role in the pro-Khartoum murahileen militias. The Missiriya have accused by many southerners of conducting widespread atrocities against the civilian population designed to collapse support for the SPLA/M during the civil war.


Though Kiir has managed to construct a façade of unity going into the 2011 independence referendum, he has also surrounded himself with former rivals of questionable loyalty. Tribal tensions between oft rivaling Nuers and Dinkas are never far from the surface. There is every possibility that an aggravated dispute over posts, appointments and revenue sharing in a newly independent South could easily lead to a localized civil war, fueled and funded by opportunists in Khartoum who would like to see the new state fail. As the vote grows ever closer there are indications that the leaders of the ruling NCP, highly adept at manipulating the international community, may attempt to force a last minute postponement of the referendum on technical grounds. Kiir has said that the SPLA/M will not declare unilateral independence, but will instead press forward with the vote without the cooperation of Khartoum. The legality of such a step, not provided for in the 2005 CPA, would give Kiir’s opponents ample ammunition to disrupt the South Sudan independence movement.


1. The SPLA/M’s structure of a dual military/political command has served as a model for a number of other Sudanese rebel movements since its formation in 1983.,,THE_JF,,SSD,456d621e2,4cfcbf682,0.html

Eventful week to a historic occassion


Late last week the GOSS Ministry of Information,released details of series of events from July 2 up to July 11,20011 including the July 9, 2011 Independence Day celebrations.

According to the programme, a series of events will take place for 10 days. These include a host of concerts, sports events and religious prayers, culminating in the big day itself in the capital Juba and across the country’s ten states. The main events will be on the eve of the Independence Day on July 9, 2011.

On the eve of independence, citizens across Southern Sudan were encouraged to go to churches or gather in public squares to light candles and say prayers, to herald the birth of the new nation. Dancing and festivities will take place in villages and across the entire country. The Catholic Church initiated nine days of prayer on the ‘theme of “Tolerance and harmonious inter-ethnic and inter-religious relationships”. On the eve of Independence Day, neighbours from all faiths will be encouraged to share a meal together.

Other faiths including Islamic groups will also take similar steps. At midnight, bells will be rung across the new country and drums will be beaten to mark the historic transition from Southern Sudan to the Republic of South Sudan (RSS) – the world’s 193rd country.

In Juba, on Saturday July 9,2011 the official programme will begin at 10 am at the Dr John Garang Mausoleum and last until the early afternoon, with a parade, official acts and a series of speeches. Some 3,500 invited guests and or their representatives will attend including kings, chiefs and elders from the 10 states, leaders from the business community, civil society, women’s groups and the youth movement.

Foreign dignitaries will include some 30 African Heads of State, leaders of regional and multilateral organisations, as well as foreign ministers and other senior officials. Over 100,000 citizens will bear witness to the events at the Mausoleum, and many others will watch on large screens across Juba city. Events will also be broadcast live on national television (SSTV) available across three continents and by international media. Simultaneous activities will take place across the land.

Security measures have been put in place all over Southern Sudan to ensure a peaceful and orderly environment for the weeklong activities. The parade of 1,500 people will include a March-Past of groups from different branches of the military, including the army, police, prison service, wildlife service and fire brigade. There will also be six groups of folklore dancers from different parts of the country, joined by women’s groups, civil society and young people.

During the ceremony, the National choir and hundreds of young South Sudanese will lead the singing of the new National Anthem, which was chosen through a competition of 49 entries by musicians, poets and academics. The song, which reflects the unity, identity, the land’s resources and the liberation struggle of the country, has been taught over the last weeks to government officials, security organs, civil society and other groups across the country. There will be a Proclamation of Independence of the Republic of South Sudan by the Speaker of the Southern Sudan Legislative Assembly (SSLA) the Rt. Hon James Wani Igga.

The flag of Sudan will then be lowered and the flag of the new Republic of South Sudan will be raised, to the tune of flag ceremonial trumpets. President, H.E. Salva Kiir Mayardit will then sign the new Transitional Constitution into force. He will then take the Oath of Office as the first President of the Republic of South Sudan.

Main speakers will include the President of South Sudan H.E. Salva Kiir Mayardit, the President of Sudan, Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, the UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, Head of the UN General Assembly and representatives from the African Union, Intergovernmental Authority on Development, Arab League, European Union, United States (representing the Americas) and China (representing Asia.) In the evening, there will be an open-air concert of folklore and music at the Nyakoron Centre and other concerts over the following days featuring distinctive music from the country’s different ethnic tribes.

Football matches will also be held, including a match between the recently-formed national team of South Sudan versus Kenya on July 10 and a basketball match against Uganda on July 11. Apart from planning for the commemoration, other work has been underway to establish the foundations of the new Republic.

Over the last few weeks, the Southern Sudan Legislative Assembly has passed some key laws that are prerequisites to the establishment of the nation. These include the Nationality and Citizenship Act, and laws on the National Flag, Anthem, Coat of Arms and State Seal.

On July 1, the Council of Ministers approved crucial draft legislation relating to the financial framework of the country, to be considered by the Assembly. These include draft bills on the formation of the Central Bank, public finance management, taxation, investment promotion, company law and medals and insignia.

The Transitional Constitution is currently before Parliament.

NAIROBI, Jan 9, 2005 — Sudan People’s Liberation Army leader John Garang has said the signing of a peace deal on 10 January opens the way for united and pluralistic Sudan “in which all Sudanese are equally stakeholders”. Garang said the agreement provided for splitting the country if this could not be achieved, but that his movement would work to preserve Sudan as “a great nation that is voluntarily united in diversity”.

JPEG - 5.3 kb
John Garang

The following is the text of Garang’s speech at the signing ceremony in Nairobi on 9 January, broadcast live by Kenyan Nation TV; subheadings inserted editorially:

“Your Excellency President Mwai Kibaki, Your Excellency former President Daniel arap Moi, Your Excellencies heads of state and government, Your excellencies ambassadors and representatives of the international organizations, distinguished invited guests, ladies and gentlemen, compatriots, fellow countrymen and women, allow me at the outset to convey to you my best wishes for the new year.

2005 year of peace

The year 2005 will mark the year of peace not only for the whole of Sudan but equally throughout our sub-region and Africa as a whole.

On this joyous day and occasion I greet and salute the people of Sudan from Nimule in the far south to Halfa in the far north, and from Geneinah in the far west to Hamashkoreb and Port Sudan in the east. I greet and salute all the marginalized rural people in Sudan who have suffered in dignified silence for so long. I greet and salute all the farmers, workers and professionals who are the creators of wealth but who have no wealth. And who have seen their living conditions deteriorate over the years.

I greet you on the occasion of this peace, which we have just signed, all the Sudanese women everywhere. Women in Sudan, as everywhere in the world, are the marginalized of the marginalized, whose suffering goes beyond description. The Sudanese rural woman, for example, gets up at five o’clock in the morning to walk five kilometres just to get five gallons of water after five hours’ walk, spends another five hours working on the family farm and five more hours making the family meal and then she goes to sleep.

I greet and salute all our students on this occasion of the peace agreement, all our youths who have borne the brunt of the 21 years of this war, and to whom the future belongs, and urge them to invest in their future and that of the nation in the post-conflict period.

Compatriots, fellow countrymen and women, congratulations – Mabruk all mabruk alaykum. Your movement, the SPLM-SPLA, and the National Congress Party government have delivered to you a comprehensive peace agreement. A just and honourable peace which we have signed today and which you have all witnessed. This is the best Christmas and New Year’s gift for the Sudanese people, to our region, and to Africa for 2005.

Agreement signals “second republic of the new Sudan”

With this peace agreement, we have ended the longest war in Africa – 39 years of two wars since August 1955 out of 50 years of our independence. And if we add the 11 years of Anyanya II, then Sudan had been at war within itself for 49 years, which is the whole of its independence period.

With this peace agreement, the SPLM and the National Congress Party government have brought half a century of war to a dignified end – congratulations.

With this peace agreement, there will be no more bombs falling from the sky on innocent children and women. Instead of the cries of children and the wailing of women and the pain of the last 21 years of war, peace will bless us once more with hearing the happy giggling of children and the enchanting ululation of women who are excited in happiness for one reason or another.

At the political level this agreement affirms the right of self determination for the people of southern Sudan and the right of popular consultation for the people of the Nuba mountains and Blue Nile so that the unity of the Sudan becomes based on the free will of the people instead of on wars and the forced and false unity of the last 49 years.

This peace agreement will change the Sudan for ever. Sudan cannot and will never be the same again as this peace agreement will engulf the country in democratic and fundamental transformations, instead of being engulfed in wars as it has always been for the last 184 years – since 1821, when our country was first invaded by outside powers and exposed to the ravages of the slave trade and predatory commerce of all sorts, and since before independence from 1955 in civil wars.

This peace agreement coincides with Sudan’s 49th independence celebrations. And I agree with what President Bashir said on 31 December [2004] in Naivasha, when we signed the last two documents of the comprehensive peace agreement – that Sudan’s independence on 1 January 1956 was not complete because [word indistinct] south. The war we are ending today first broke out in Torit on 18 August 1955. Four months before independence. And so the south, like other marginalized parts of the Sudan were really not part of that independence. With this peace agreement we begin the process of achieving real independence by all Sudanese people and for all the Sudanese people.

The signing of this comprehensive peace agreement thus marks the end of what I will correctly call the first republic of the whole Sudan that has lasted 49 years from 1 January 1956 to 31 December 2004, when we signed the last two agreements on comprehensive cease-fire and implementation modalities. And at a personal note, exactly 42 years to the date when I first left Sudan for the bush on 31 December 1962 to join the first war. I hope I will not go to the bush again.

This peace agreement therefore signals the beginning of Sudan’s second republic of the new Sudan. From here on Sudan for the first time will be a country voluntarily united in justice, honour and dignity for all its citizens regardless of their race, regardless of their religion, regardless of their gender or else if the country fails to rise to this challenge of moving away from the old Sudan to the new Sudan of free and equal citizens, then the union shall be dissolved amicably and peacefully through the right of self determination at the end the six years of the interim period.

I call on the Sudanese people to join this peace agreement, to join the SPLM and the National Congress Party in the peace process, because this peace agreement belongs to them. I does not belong to John Garang or the SPLM leadership, it does not belong to [Vice-President] Ali Uthman Taha or President Al-Bashir or to the National Congress Party. This agreement belongs to all of the Sudan, to its neighbours, to Africa, to the Arab world and indeed to the rest of the world. That is why you see this big attendance today, because this peace belongs to all of them.

Although the comprehensive peace agreement was negotiated by two parties as a matter of necessity and practicality in order to end the war in the first place, and now that the war is ended, I call on all the Sudanese people and their political forces to build consensus around this comprehensive peace agreement, and use it to end war in other parts of Sudan and to relaunch the Sudan to the promised land of the new Sudan of progress and equality, of opportunity for all Sudanese citizens without distinction.

Tribute to “martyrs”; release of POWs

Finally and last but not least, I salute all our martyrs and all wounded heroes on both sides. I salute and congratulate all officers, NCOs and soldiers on both sides of the conflict for their heroic sacrifices. I pay tribute and thank our civil population who provided the logistics for the war, especially those in the SPLM-administered areas, for without their contribution this comprehensive peace agreement would not have been possible. It is because of the role played by our civil population in the long war that we have invited some 50 chiefs and traditional leaders representing our civil society at the grassroots. We have also invited the SPLM military band to represent the SPLA rank and file.

On this joyous occasion of the signing of the comprehensive peace agreement, as you will recall that the SPLA has always released prisoners of war, we have released so far more than 3,000 prisoners of war at various times over the last 21 years. I here as of today order the immediate release of all prisoners of war that are still under the custody and care of the SPLA.

Moment for Tsunami victims

It is fitting, as we celebrate this momentous historical landmark, to pause to remember the thousands of fellow human beings who recently perished in both Asia and Africa in one of the planet’s worst natural disasters of the modern era.

Our hearts go out in grief and solidarity to the peoples of south east Asia in this their hour of tragedy in the hands of a merciless earthquake and tsunamis. As we share the pain and suffering of our fellow human beings in all the countries that have been devastated by the earthquake and the accompanying tsunamis or tidal waves, we also urge the international community, after it has pledged so generously to help alleviate the suffering and rebuild shattered lives in the affected region, to spare some resources to help post-conflict Sudan recover and develop. We therefore look forward to a massive turn out of donors with their pledges at the prospective Oslo donors conference for Sudan which is scheduled soon.

“An all-inclusive Sudanese state”

Excellencies, compatriots, fellow citizens. In order to understand and appreciate the present historical moment of the signing of the Sudan comprehensive peace agreement, I beg your indulgence to allow me to talk briefly about the problem that we are solving now and to which [Ugandan] President [Yoweri] Museveni referred to before as the problem of people with the turbines and people with ostrich feathers.

As I said before, Sudan has been at war within itself for the whole of 49 years of its independence. And as we end this war today, another serious one is intensifying in the western Darfur region while another threatens in eastern Sudan.

Why? What is the problem? Why should a community subject itself to generations of war and suffering in so many parts of the country?

In our view, the attempts by various Khartoum-based regimes since 1956 to build a monolithic Arab Islamic state with the exclusion of other parameters of the Sudanese diversity constitutes the fundamental problem of the Sudan and defines the Sudanese conflict. The Sudanese state hitherto has excluded the vast majority of the Sudanese people from governance and therefore their marginalization in the political, economic and social fields.

This provoked resistance by the excluded. There have been wars and there continues to be wars in the Sudan simply because the majority of the Sudanese are not stakeholders in the governance.

The solution to the fundamental problem of Sudan is to involve an all-inclusive Sudanese state which will uphold the new Sudan. A new political Sudanese dispensation in which all Sudanese are equally stakeholders irrespective of their religion, irrespective of their race, tribe or gender – and if this does not work, then to look for other solutions, such as splitting the country. But we believe that a new Sudan is possible for there are many people in northern Sudan who share with us in SPLM/A, including the National Congress Party, who believe in the universal ideals of humanity, the ideals of liberty, of freedom, justice and equality, of opportunity for all Sudanese citizens.

As is the case in the south, the events in Darfur, eastern Sudan and elsewhere have made it clear that we must have an all-inclusive state at the national level and full devolution of power to the various regions of the Sudan, for otherwise it is unlikely that the country would stand a chance of remaining united. But this all-inclusive Sudanese state which we have called the new Sudan must have some basis, for example in history, that makes us one country or one nation. The question is whether there is the basis for the Sudan as a country, and my answer has also been yes, there is. That is, this affirmative answer to this question has guided us and sustained the SPLM for the last 21 years until today. For this purpose I have always wanted to go down the corridors of history and I want to do this very briefly. Again, begging your indulgence, and taking it for that matter – I am guerrilla, I take my time you see.

Move forward with the momentum of 5,000 years

My presentation, our presentation in the SPLM is that we, the Sudanese, are indeed a historical people and that the new Sudan has an anchor in history. If we cannot find an anchor in history, then we either create one or dissolve the union peacefully. Sometimes it is necessary to go back in order to gain momentum in order to go forward. President Museveni called it something in his language. That is why you see sheep, you see rams moving backward first when they fight. They gain momentum before they lock horns. Recently, in southeast Asia, it was noticed that the tragedy of the earthquake and the tsunamis. First, the sea receded back, and then came forward with devastating force.

We very much need to do this exercise in the Sudan. To go back thousands of years so as to rediscover ourselves. Gain momentum and then move forward with the momentum of 5,000 years to propel ourselves and snatch ourselves into history once again. And we have a very long history indeed. Peoples and kingdoms have lived, thrived and disappeared in the geographical area that constitutes the present modern Sudan.

Many people will be surprised that in the Bible, in the Old Testament, the Sudan was part of the Garden of Eden, where it is stated in Genesis Chapter 2, Verse 8 to 14, that the Garden of Eden was watered by four rivers. One of them is the White Nile, it is Pessian in the Bible. The one is the Gihon and there is a Gihon Hotel in Addis Ababa. It is the Blue Nile. And to the east by the Tigris and Euphrates. So the Garden of Eden was not a small vegetable garden. It was a vast piece of territory. My own village happens to be just east of the Nile. So I fall in the Garden of Eden. It will surprise many of you that the Prophet Moses was probably married to a Sudanese named Siphorah, as narrated in the book of Numbers.

From the Biblical days, we move to the ancient Sudanese kingdoms of Awach, of Ritat, of Anu, of Maida, that are believed to be connected with the present day Dinka, Shiluk, Nuer, other Nilotic tribes and the peoples of central and western Sudan. And at the corridors of history we move to the Kingdom of Merowe [Arabic Marawi] that bequeathed an iron civilization to the rest of Africa. Merhawi got transformed into the Christian kingdoms of Nubia. Then followed the spread of Islam and Arab migrations into the Sudan and subsequent collapse of the last Nubian Christian kingdoms of Makuria, Alawa and Soba in 1504, followed by the rise on the etches of the Islamic Kingdom Sinnar, which was founded by the Fuinsh and Shiluk people.

The rest of Sudanese history is familiar to all of us from the Islamic kingdoms of Sinar to the Teko Egyptian occupation, to the first Islamic Mahadisi state, to Anglo-Egyptian condominium to independence in 1956 and the Anyanya movement to 1955 to 1972 to the SPLM/SPLA in 1983, to the second Islamic state in the Sudan of Ingas, with which we negotiated from 1989 and to the comprehensive which we signed today. This is the history of the Sudan and this is how we got here. It has been a long journey of more than 5,000 years to reach Naivasha and Nyayo Stadium today. It is important to know and appreciate where we came from in order to better be able to chart the way forward with the momentum of historical force. That was Sudan in history.

National unity through pluralism and democracy

As for the contemporary Sudan, we have more than 500 different ethnic groups speaking more than 130 different languages. We have two major religions in the country – Islam and Christianity, and traditional African religious. Our contention in the SPLM/SPLA is that the Sudan belongs equally to all the peoples that now inhabit the country and its history, its diversity and richness is the common heritage of all Sudanese. The comprehensive peace agreement that we have signed today is based on this historical and contemporary objective realities of Sudan. And by implementing the provisions of the comprehensive peace agreement that we signed today, we (?evolve) an all-inclusive form of governance that ensures that all Sudanese are equally stakeholders irrespective of where they come from and this is what will keep our country together.

Furthermore, by adapting and applying the form of governance and wealth-sharing arrangements stipulated in the comprehensive peace agreement to other parts of the country with similar afflictions as the south such as Darfur, eastern Sudan and other parts of the country, we can once again become a great nation that is voluntarily united in diversity rather than divided by diversity and forcibly kept under a coerced and fake unity.

This is the context and the value of the comprehensive peace agreement we have signed today. It provides the Sudan with a real and perhaps the last opportunity to make a real paradigm shift from the old Sudan of exclusivity to the new Sudan of inclusivity achieved not through force but through the exercise of the right of self-determination.

Viewed this way the right of self-determination, which is one of the cornerstones of the comprehensive peace agreement, is a blessing rather then curse as many northern Sudanese fear. I want to assure you that we will all work together with the National Congress Party and other political forces in the Sudan so that we develop a new paradigm so that we keep our country together.

Excellencies, distinguished guests, compatriots, ladies and gentlemen, bear with me. I am almost finished. The transformation which shall be engendered by this agreement, which I have alluded to shall be reflected first and foremost in democratic (?mutation) and to which the SPLM is fully committed. Surely by democratic we do not mean return to the sham procedural democracy of the past, which was a camouflage for the perpetuation of vested interest. In that sham democracy civil rights were subject to the whims of rulers. The majority of Sudanese regions remained peripheral to the central power and was treated as an expendable quantum only to be manipulated through political trickery and double-dealing.

The transformation envisaged in the comprehensive peace agreement puts an end to all that since it represents a political and socioeconomic paradigm shift which entails the recognition of political diversity by guaranteeing full freedom for political pluralism. The entrenchment of human rights and peoples’ rights in the constitution, the upholding of the independence of the judiciary, including the creation of an inviolable constitutional court and commitment to the rule of law by the government and the governed, and the establishment of a truly independent and competent civil service at all levels of government. It also conceptualizes and seeks to realize a recreation of the legislature in a manner that shall ensure rigorous checks and balances and guarantees powers to the government of southern Sudan and to the states powers which can neither be withdrawn nor impaired by other centres of power.

Eventually, the comprehensive peace agreement ordains that within a maximum of three to four years governance at all levels shall be mandated by the supreme will of the people through internationally monitored free and fair elections.

Economic and social development

Excellencies, distinguished guests, compatriots, ladies and gentlemen, the long war to which we have put an end to today impoverished our citizens and reduced our country with tremendous resources to destitution. Without claiming that the new economic paradigm shift, which I have alluded to, is the ultimate panacea for curing the nation’s ills, it provides at least a vision and modalities to address the problems besetting the nation in the here and now – while I leave the world hereafter to those who claim to have divine qualifications.

In southern Sudan and other war-affected areas, as well as in the slums of our major cities, the baseline from which we shall start development is shocking and I will not bore here with the statistics of the status of these parameters such as prevalence of child malnutrition, primary education, mortality rates among children, rate of maternal mortality, rate of births attended skilled health staff, access to improved water sources. These statistics in southern Sudan, in particular and other war-affected areas are among the worst in the world. To combat this pervasive and humiliating poverty and political disenfranchisement, a general policy framework has chartered out and published in a booklet entitled SPLM Strategic Framework for War to Peace Transition.

In summary, the SPLM shall articulate and implement a social, political and economic development strategy and programmes that include the following highlights:

First, the SPLM shall adopt an economic development paradigm that emphasizes growth through rural development and transformation of traditional agriculture that is integrated with agro-industries. We must transform the present subsistence traditional agriculture in southern Sudan and other areas through technological innovations, making agriculture the engine of growth. And agriculture as the engine of growth will literally be fuelled by oil – the building of dikes for flood control and canals and underground water development for irrigation will be priorities to guaranteeing crop production.

Secondly, the SPLM will change the urban-based and centre of focus development paradigm in favour of rural and decentralized development. The SPLM vision, policy and slogan shall be to take the towns to people in the countryside rather than people to towns, where they end up in slums as happened in many countries with the consequent deterioration in their quality of life. Rural small town planning and rural electrification will therefore be priorities.

Thirdly the SPLM shall emphasize and develop new ways of delivery of social services. As we move to the new era of peace, the people of Sudan, particularly the war-affected communities, face formidable social and economic problems and also tremendous opportunities. The major problems there require immediate attention fall in the areas of health, education and water. We must find new ways to rapidly and efficiently deliver these services. For example, constructing windmills all over rural Sudan to provide clean drinking water and build micro-dams for generating small scale hydro-electric power for rural towns as well as the use of solar, wind and bio-gas energy sources.

Fourthly, the SPLM shall exert all efforts to build physical infrastructure – roads, rail and river transport and telecommunications. There has never been any tarmac road in the new Sudan since creation, since the days of Adam and Eve, and this is an area the size of Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi put together. The SPLM’s vision for transport infrastructure is at three levels – to develop regional linkages within southern Sudan and with the neighbours and with northern Sudan and to involve the state and local communities in this infrastructure building.

Fifthly and finally, in terms of social and cultural parameters, the SPLM shall adopt the strategies and programmes that shall restore and achieve dignity of people of the Sudan through social and cultural empowerment. Programmes will include information and media, radio, TV, print, promotion of new Sudan art, songs, dances, theatre of new Sudan, sports, development of local languages and cultures by the various communities of the Sudan, archives of the struggle and modern history of Sudan, archaeology, antiquities and ancient history of Sudan, Africa and the Middle East so that we can find our rightful place in the world.

“Building national consensus”

Excellencies, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, to conclude, the comprehensive peace agreement and safeguards, full compliance with the requirements of the agreement, the SPLM will work in partnership with the National Congress Party. The objectives of this partnership is to ensure a sincere implementation of the comprehensive peace agreement in both letter and spirit and to provide, within the parameters of this agreement, permanent solutions to the problems inherent in Sudan’s cultural, social and political diversity.

Failure to appreciate the wealth in diversity was another cause of national crisis. For diversity, viewed positively is a mutually [word indistinct] phenomenon and ultimately a source of national cohesion and strength. Viewed otherwise, that is as a source of dissimilarity or distinction, it shall lead inevitably to the ultimate disintegration of the country as threatens today and which at all costs we must avoid.

Furthermore, the partnership does not mean abandonment of political allies by any of the two parties. However, this partnership, once safeguarded in the new political dispensation, shall in effect nurture the democratic transformation and political multiplicity, which by their very nature may lead to diverse alliances. But so long as those alliances are based on commitment to the letter and spirit of the peace agreements that will put an end to the longest war in Africa, alliances become assets not liabilities. It is our submission that political struggle in the Sudan shall henceforth translate into competing visions of peace, progress and development and never into the use of force or the threat of the use of force.

The SPLM, ladies and gentlemen, will ensure that the new political dispensation is wide enough to accommodate all legitimate political and social forces in the country. It is therefore our hope to achieve popular consensus on those agreements. As the movement that has been fighting against the marginalization of others, we shall not tolerate the exclusion of anybody from this process. The parties to the comprehensive peace agreement share this conviction and we have included in the agreement inclusiveness. In this regard the SPLM will play its role at the national level to work with the National Congress Party and other political forces to ensure full inclusiveness.

While the SPLM and the National Congress Party shall be major partners in the initial interim government unity, our understanding of partnership is well rooted in inclusiveness, which means to bring on board all political forces in the Sudan, chief among them the political parties within the National Congress Party umbrella and the political parties within the National Democratic Alliance, which we call upon to complete negotiations with the government of Sudan based on the Jeddah agreement that are holding negotiations in Cairo and so that they get their share in the government of national unity and participate and participate fully in all the national commissions stipulated in the comprehensive peace agreement, especially the national constitution review commission.

Finally, on issues that concern southern Sudanese, I want to say a little on south-south dialogue. On building national consensus, the SPLM will also spearhead the south-south dialogue. This dialogue, above all, is to heal wounds and restore fraternity and mutual respect so as to create a healthier political environment that is accommodative all southern Sudanese political forces, both at the level of southern Sudan and at the national level. But south-south dialogue is not only about power. It is about all and (?enviable) democratic exercise based on mature and selfless political discourse among southern Sudanese with a view of galvanizing all our human material resources for the service of our people.

Democracy, whether in the north or south, should no longer and solely be a struggle for power but rather as a competition on providing good governance, development and delivering social services for our people and restoring the dignity and wealth of every man and woman. Yet in terms of power-sharing in southern Sudan, I want to assure all that there will be enough room for everybody, including those who have not beenassociated with theSPLM/SPLA. Even those who for one reason or another were opposed or against the SPLM, there will room for everybody.

I want in conclusion to quote, in terms of this inclusiveness, the gospel according to St John, that says in St John Chapter 14, Verse 1 and 2: Do not be worried and upset, Jesus told them, believe in God and believe also in me. There are many rooms in my father’s house and I’m going to prepare a place for you. I would not say if it were not true. So I say to all southern Sudanese on the occasion of this signing of this comprehensive peace agreement, that there will be many rooms in an SPLM-based government in southern Sudan and all are welcome.

I also want to assure southern Sudanese in general that the comprehensive peace agreement will not be dishonoured like other agreements that Able Aliao [phonetic] has written a book about entitled: Too Many Agreements Dishonoured. The biggest challenge will be implementation of the peace agreement but we, both the SPLM and the National Congress Party, are committed, fully committed to the implementation of this agreement. There are both external and internal guarantees, organic and external guarantees that will ensure the implementation of this agreement.

I want also to assure the SPLA that the experience of Anyanya I will not repeat itself because there are many SPLA soldiers that are worried they will be left by peace. This regards the issue of funding of the armed forces. We solved the issue of funding of the armed adequately. The joint integrated units, component of the SPLA, shall be funded by the government of national unity, not as a separate army from the mother SPLM but as part and parcel of it with the same wage and living conditions.

The mother SPLA, on the other hand, will be funded by the government of southern Sudan and the government of southern Sudan has been empowered by the comprehensive peace agreement to raise financial resources from both local and foreign sources and to seek international assistance for that purpose. So there is no reason for concern or alarm.

As for those who in the Diaspora, I would like to address them and assure them that the government of southern Sudan as well as the government of national unity will their skills and I take the opportunity of this forum to appeal to all our Diaspora to return home and build our country. As I said before our house has many rooms and Diaspora are welcome to return home and fully participate in the development of southern Sudan, the two areas – Abiey and the whole of Sudan.

Tributes and acknowledgements

Last but not least, I would like to pay tribute to our fallen heroes and martyrs who sacrificed in order for us celebrate this day on both sides of the conflict. Those, ladies and gentlemen, are the objectives for whose achievements I have exerted all my faculties and energies and efforts, and for which we will cooperate and work together with the National Congress Party. We move in a new direction and achieve the cohesion and the unity of our people and the unity of our country.

Finally, let me pay tribute and salute the courage of the party to reach this agreement and in particular President Umar Hasan al-Bashir and Ustadh Ali Uthman Taha, with whom I sat for 16 months and negotiated this agreement. I salute and congratulate them. I also congratulate the two delegations of the SPLM and the government of Sudan and of course Gen Sumbeiywo and before him Ambassador Daniel Mboya, who was the special envoy, also before them, Zachary Onyango, Bethwel Kiplagat, and foreign minister then Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka and now Minister [for Regional Cooperation John] Koech and other ministers in the Kenya government, who have contributed so much; and to the IGAD [Intergovernmental Authority on Development] envoys of the five countries of IGAD, the facilitators of IGAD, the secretariat. I thank them and congratulate them for guiding the peace process to this successful conclusion.

I would also like to thank and commend the IGAD heads of state, ministers, peace envoys and indeed the populace who have been with us through thick and thin, guiding, advising, cajoling and sometimes threatening to abandon the process. They deserve praise. Our thanks go to them and also to the bravery of the people of east Africa, the Horn, the Arab world and the wider international community, who on numerous occasions either volunteered to bring peace to Sudan or did encourage in meaningful manners the ongoing peace process. In this connection, the Nigerian efforts of Abuja I and Abuja II, the joint Egyptian-Libyan initiative, the African Union and the Arab League efforts, who exerted efforts for post-conflict reconstruction.

I must also mention a few of the very many names to thank for their contribution to the Sudan peace process, among them are eminent people like President Obasanjo, President Babangida of Nigeria, President Kaunda, Masire, Machel, Nujoma, Chissano, Rawlings, who is here with us today, Mandela of South Africa, Mubarak of Egypt, Qadhafi, Bouteflika, who is here with us today, Jimmy Carter, the late James Grant, and OLS, that has saved millions of lives since 1989, President Bush and his Secretary of State Colin Powell and his special envoy Senator Danforth and Andrew Natsos of USAID, both houses of the US Congress, Prime Minister Tony Blair and his envoys, ambassadors Allan Gulty and McFell, the UN secretary-general and his envoys, ambassadors Sahnun and Pronk, who are here, and a special friend of the Sudan peace process, the Norwegian Minister Hilder Johnson and finally, last but not least, the leaders of this region, led by then President Daniel arap Moi and now by President Mwai Kibaki, President Museveni, [Ethiopian] Prime Minister [Meles] Zenawi, [Eritrean] President [Isayas] Afewerki and the wananchi [citizens] of Kenya and east Africa mzima [as a whole].

And finally I pay tribute and thanks to my dear wife Rebecca and the wives of all my colleagues and comrades in the struggle for their patience and contributions, for without their help the bush would not have been bearable. My sincere thanks to all these people. I pay tribute finally to all the Sudanese people, to whom this peace belongs and I say to them and I say to them mobruk ol lekum [congratulations].

Thank you very much.”

Dr.john Garang Speeches On CPA 
Splm Chairman’s Address on the occasion of the Third Conference on Federalism in Brussels, Belgium March 5, 2005
Click Here For the Schedules Of the conference on Federalism which ended yesterday.
(March 5, 2005)
Sudan’s Comprehensive Peace Agreement and FederalismYour Excellency, Mrs. Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, President of the Conference;

Your Excellencies; Honorable Delegates; Distinguished Guests; Ladies and Gentlemen;

Allow me to sincerely thank the people and the government of the Kingdom of Belgium for having honored the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) by inviting me as the Head of the organization to attend and address this important international conference on federalism. To us in Sudan, this conference is timely because it is taking place a few weeks after signing of the Sudan Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), an accord that has brought to an end one of the world’s longest civil wars. The theme of the Conference, Federalism or some cousin of federalism, is the bedrock of the CPA.

I said a cousin of federalism because I am not sure what to call the system of governance in the CPA. We have not used any formal word in the entire CPA to describe the type of governance that we have negotiated and agreed on. Perhaps we were guided by the African saying not to name a child before it is born. The CPA took us ten years to negotiate, from 1994 to 2004, and before this we had two years of negotiations in the Nigerian Capital of Abuja. Interestingly in Abuja the SPLM tabled confederation, which the Government of Sudan (GOS) rejected, while the GOS offered federation, which the SPLM rejected, and to add more confusion the Nigerian mediators recommended “true federalism”, which both sides, the GOS and SPLM, rejected. However, although the Abuja talks collapsed, they provided valuable experience for the subsequent negotiations sponsored by the countries of Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD).

In the IGAD peace process and after eight years of frustrating negotiations the SPLM and GOS sat down to business in Machakos and Naivasha with the resolve to negotiate and solve the serious problem of war and peace, instead of being bogged down in whether we should have a federation, a confederation or true federalism. Now that the child has been born researchers can give the name that they believe best depicts the arrangements the Sudanese have agreed in the Sudan Comprehensive Peace Agreement.

In the literature on federalism, analysts identify two processes of federalism: So-called “coming-together” federations formed by independent states for the sake of common goods otherwise unattainable, and “holding-together” federations, which develop from unitary states as governments respond to mitigate threats of secession. In the Sudanese situation both processes are involved as the Sudanese seek to “come together”, perhaps for the first time, and as they try to “hold together” to preserve a union that was imposed on them by colonialism.

While trying to “hold together” to preserve a union which was not of their making, the Sudanese are thus involved in an even more serious and complex project — that of evolving and developing a political entity, a new Sudanese political dispensation and union arrived at through consensus to replace the present Sudanese state, which some Sudanese inherited from the colonial regime and with which the majority of Sudanese do not identify.

I am not here bemoaning the colonial experience. Nations or nation-states are the product of the historical movement of peoples, even of historical accidents. People move for different reasons — in search of better opportunities, escaping religious or other forms of persecution, or even out of curiosity — what is behind the hill? And they often do not come back to their original home. They end up making a home behind the hill with different peoples who also ended up there for similar reasons. Overtime these different peoples interact and a new socio-political entity emerges, an entity organized at present by humanity in the form of “nation states”. The colonial encounter and the historical movement of peoples are thus some of the historical events that have contributed to the making of the present country called Sudan. The real task facing the Sudanese is therefore to build a Sudanese “nation-state” out of these circumstances, a Sudanese political dispensation that belongs equally to all its citizens irrespective of race, ethnicity, religion or gender, something which we have not done before and which lies at the root of the wars we are now seeing afflicting our country all over — in Southern Sudan, Nuba Mountains, Blue Nile, Eastern Sudan and Darfur.

What we really need to do, which we should have done 50 years ago at independence, but which I am happy we are doing now in Sudan, is to go back to appreciate the classical justification of the State as based on a “social contract” between the people and the State. I am aware of the controversy over the notion of the “social contract”, yet what should make the State legitimate is if it is the result of an agreement by the people who are subject or subject themselves to the State.

The question then is whether the present Sudanese State would be the object of an agreement if the Sudanese people were asked? The conventional wisdom is that Northern Sudanese would answer the question in the affirmative that the present Sudanese State is the object of an agreement and that Sudan exercised the right of self-determination at independence in 1956. Southern Sudanese on the other hand would answer in the negative, and instead argue that they have never been part of any agreement on the present Sudanese State before, at or after independence and therefore demand the right of self-determination. To compound things even more, the legitimacy of the present Sudanese State is not only being challenged by Southern Sudanese, it is also being questioned by the people of Darfur, Eastern Sudan, Nuba Mountains, Blue Nile, the far North and other parts of the country. Many Sudanese are asking a serious question, whether the present Sudanese State as inherited from 1956 at independence represents their interests in their various groupings and regions. The present crisis and wars in the Sudan spring from the fact that many Sudanese do not associate with the present Sudanese State, although many identify with a Sudanese entity or homeland.

In fact, the present Sudanese State was originally contrived as a result of the colonial encounter and its initial objective was to achieve interests that were particular to colonialism. It was therefore not based on any social contract or agreement by the Sudanese people. It can even be argued that the colonial encounter shifted and distorted the trajectory of indigenous nation-state formation and that this continues to haunt Africa today.

It is this type of state that Sudanese elites in Khartoum and the adjacent Riverian areas of Central Sudan took over at independence. Sadly, there was no conscious attempt by these elites to recast the State, to base its legitimacy on a social contract and consensus of the people. These elites took over the colonial state and looked at it as if it were a magical tree that perpetually bears and gives to them fruits of all kinds. In Africa the colonially inherited State became like the proverbial goose that lays golden eggs. Unfortunately for them as the elites fought and continue to fight over custody of the goose, they killed the goose along with millions of innocent people. One sees the death of the goose in the collapse of the colonially inherited State from Liberia to Sierra Leone, to DR Congo, to Somalia, and the death of the goose threatens in my own country, the Sudan. This may be a blessing in disguise, unfortunately a terribly expensive blessing! With the collapse of the colonially inherited State, or the threat of its collapse, this may or should sufficiently challenge Africa to conceptualize a correct and sustainable form of State that is based on the notion of a social contract that represents the interests of all the people in that State. This approach could result in a possible redrawing of the colonially inherited boundaries in Africa so as to be better able to face the realities and challenges of the 21st Century and beyond, to forestall unnecessary and costly wars, and to promote development and prosperity for the peoples of Africa and the world using Africa’s vast natural resources.

The Comprehensive Peace Agreement that the Sudanese negotiated voluntarily and signed on January 9th is based on this fundamental paradigm shift, the shift from the colonially inherited elitist State of the Old Sudan based on the hegemony of a few and marginalization of the vast majority, to a new Sudanese political dispensation of a plural Sudan in which political power, wealth and sovereignty are equitably shared, and with special security arrangements for the armed forces and other security forces, so that they protect rather than use their physical force to take over the state as has often happened in many countries.

During the negotiations, we took each problem and solved it pragmatically and with the aim of ultimately evolving a new Sudanese State, so that we have a Sudan that is united voluntarily by consensus of its peoples in a social contract, or otherwise failing to achieve such a voluntary and new union then we dissolve the colonially inherited Sudanese State amicably and peacefully.

Your Excellency, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen;

I would like in summary and conclusion to present the CPA in the context of this paradigm shift from the Old Sudan to the New Sudan by briefly illustrating how we resolved five of the most difficult issues in the negotiations – the right of self-determination, Sharia Islamic Law, power sharing, wealth sharing, and security Arrangements,

The first problem addressed by the CPA is how to accommodate the Sudanese diversity within the context of one country; how to keep people of diverse backgrounds together. The Sudan has over 500 different ethnic groups, speaking more than 130 distinct languages. These ethnic groups fall into two broad categories, indigenous African Sudanese, those whose mother tongue is some African language other than Arabic constituted 69% of the population at independence in 1956, while Arab Sudanese, those who have Arabic as their community language, were 31% of the population. Ethnicity is thus one major form of cotemporary diversity. The other form of contemporary diversity is religion. The Muslims are mostly in the North and constitute about 65% of the total population, while Christians and followers of Traditional African Religious constitute the remaining 35%. Sudan also has a rich and long historical heritage. Civilizations and various forms of the State have flourished and perished in the geographical area that constitutes the present modern Sudan, from ancient Cush of the Biblical days to Christian Nubia and Merowe, to the Islamic States of Sennar and Darfur, to the Turko-Egyptian and Anglo-Egyptian regimes of recent years.

Yet, and despite the richness of Sudan’s historical and contemporary diversity, the current and previous rulers of Khartoum present a false picture of the country. They based the Sudanese State on a poor mixture of a dysfunctional colonially inherited State and two exclusionist ideologies of Arabism and Islamism. They insisted that Islamic Sharia must be the supreme law of the land and even waged Jihad to impose it. This poor vision of Sudan by the present and previous regimes has been the fundamental problem of Sudan responsible for the many wars.

The CPA addresses the problem of diversity in the Machakos Protocol, signed in July 2002, by making two bold compromises. Firstly, the Agreement gives Sudan an Interim Period of six years to make unity attractive, at the end of which the people of Southern Sudan shall exercise the right of self-determination to choose between continuing in the unity framework that shall be put in place during the Interim Period, or otherwise opt for independence. Secondly, the Agreement accords the people of Northern Sudan their right to Sharia Islamic Law, confining Sharia to the North, and leaving it to Northerners to reconcile their demand to be ruled by Islamic Sharia in the public domain while at the same time sharing the same public domain with others. As for Southern Sudan Sharia Islamic Law will not apply during the Interim Period; instead there will be established a secular democratic state. The CPA thus establishes a “One-Country-Two Systems” Model, a secular system in the South and a theocratic system in Northern Sudan.

The Machakos Protocol has handled the two most contentious issues of Islamic Sharia law and the right of self-determination courageously and with the aim of accommodating diversity. One does not need to be a biologist to know that biodiversity is a good thing. A multiplicity of species of plants and animals on our planet increases every one’s chances of survival, and ensures that life continues on earth. Finding appropriate ways to accommodate diversity in Sudan will likewise ensure the survival of the Sudan as one country.

Your Excellency, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen,

The third issue addressed in the CPA is that of power sharing. To reflect the “one country two systems” model there will an asymmetric system of two Governments, a Government of National Unity (GONU) at the centre for the whole country, and a largely autonomous Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS), that shall have under it ten of Sudan’s 25 States, while the 15 States of the North will be under the GONU. There will also be strong local governments under the States in both North and South. The GOSS is linked to the GONU mainly through the constitutional Court, the Central Bank, the Joint Defense Board and the office of the 1st Vice President, who is also President of GOSS, otherwise Southern Sudan shall be largely autonomous in all its three branches of government: the executive, legislature and judiciary including a Supreme Court of Southern Sudan. The State Governments in both North and South also have considerable degree of autonomy. Power and sovereignty are truly shared between North and South and with the Sates. This system has a great potential and advantage of preserving and protecting the rights of all people belonging to different ethnic, racial, religious and linguistic groups who live in diverse parts of the Sudan.

Your Excellency, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen:

The fourth problem addressed by the CPA is the issue of wealth sharing. The CPA would not work if the GOSS and the States are not afforded the necessary resources. Accordingly, the CPA provides the GOSS with three organic sources of revenues: 50% of oil revenues generated in Southern Sudan where most of Sudan’s oil lies; 50% of national non-oil revenues generated in Southern Sudan and GOSS own taxation. In addition to these three organic sources of revenue, the GOSS shall be entitled to engage in some international relations including “the initiation, negotiation and conclusion of international and regional agreements on culture, sports, trade, investment, credit, loans, grants and technical assistance with foreign governments and foreign non-governmental organizations”.

One of the most contentious problems in the wealth sharing negotiations was the status of the Central Bank of Sudan. The SPLM had demanded a separate Central Bank for Southern Sudan to reflect the “two system one country” model prescribed by the Machakos Protocol especially as it relates to Islamic banking in Northern Sudan. The compromise reached at the end was quite innovative: to have one Central Bank with one door and two windows; one window for Northern Sudan operating an Islamic banking system using Islamic financial Instruments, and the other window for Southern Sudan operated by the Bank of Southern Sudan (BOSS) using conventional financial instruments. It was also agreed to have one currency that shall be agreed by the Parties, but in the meantime the Parties shall use the currencies they have in their respective areas as legal tender.

The fifth and final difficult issue in the CPA was that of security arrangements during the Interim Period. The question was the existence of two armies: that of the Government or Sudan’s Armed Forces (SAF) and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), and what to do with them. The Parties took a bold decision for each side to keep its armed forces during the entire six years of the Interim Period. The Parties further agreed to form Joint Integrated Units (JIUs) from the two armed forces. The main SPLA and some JIUs shall be deployed in the South, while the main SAF and some JIUs shall be deployed in the North. The Parties also agreed to develop a common military doctrine for training of the JIUs as well as for training of the two armed forces. The JIUs shall serve as a symbol of national unity and sovereignty of Sudan during the Interim Period and shall be commanded by a Joint Defense Board (JDB) that shall be co-chaired by the Chiefs of Staff of the two armed forces. The JIUs shall form the nucleus of the future unified army of Sudan should the referendum on self-determination confirm unity, otherwise they would be dissolved and melt back to their mother armies.

Your Excellency, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen,

The CPA is a unique Sudanese achievement that I believe shall forever change Sudan as well as have fundamental and positive impact on our Region and Africa. At the onset, the CPA can be adapted and applied to solve the tragic situation of war in Darfur and Eastern Sudan, for it would make no sense to achieve peace in Southern Sudan and make war in other parts of Sudan. I also believe that the Sudan CPA can be adapted to solve similar situations in Africa and elsewhere. In particular the models of power sharing and security arrangements in the CPA can be used to achieve bigger governance entities in African. The 17 countries of our Region for example, from Sudan to the Horn to East and Central Africa, including DR Congo, have a combined population of about 300 million and an area of about 12 million Square Kilometers. By surrendering some of their sovereignty to a central political authority and retaining some sovereignty and state identity, the peoples of these countries can achieve tremendous development and prosperity using their vast resources, building physical infrastructure, viable markets, power generation and free movement of people goods and services instead of the inter and intra-State wars and instability that have afflicted our Region. This would be good for Africa, and it would it would provide lucrative markets and investment opportunities for Europe, America and the world.

Your Majesty, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

At this juncture, and before I close, I would like to bring to the attention of this august conference that the task ahead of us, the task of implementation of the CPA, is daunting and requires the commitment and participation first of all the Sudanese people and assistance from the international community. I therefore take the opportunity of this podium to ask the EU, Belgium and the individual countries of Europe to assist us translate the CPA into action so as to fulfill the expectations of the Sudanese people and achieve peace and stability in the Region and Africa.

Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have only presented a synopsis of the CPA as it relates to the theme of this conference. It is a long and detailed document of some 241 pages. I give a copy of the CPA here for the perusal of the conference. Now that the child has been born, you can decide what to call the form of governance that we have agreed to in the CPA, whether it is a federation, confederation or true federalism or some other “ism”. Whatever one calls it, it is an agreement that was negotiated by the Sudanese to end a war that had lasted 21 years with very high cost.

I thank you very much for inviting the SPLM and for your listening. Thank you.

Dr. John Garang de Mabior

Greetings from Khartoum!

Read what I have written and give your views regarding the same.Thank you all – NDM


South-South Dialogue is it Division of Power in the South?

By Nichola Dominic Mandil, Khartoum, Sudan

The central idea that dominates debates among Southerners these days here in Khartoum and abroad is the so-called “South-South Dialogue” to convene in Rumbek/Yerol on the 15th March 2005. The temperature in Rumbek will rise three times than ever as a result of tempestuous debates that will take place!

Why I say this is because Southern Sudanese from different walks of life will be present therein. Different professions, different specializations, political leaders, intellectuals, technocrats, youth, women and students will give their own views on the future of the South, and how they want the South to be like in the coming period. This is how I for see the Rumbek-South-South Dialogue will be all about. I hope it will be what Southerners want not what other people want it to be!

Apart from deliberating on the future of the South, yet, some of our people in South still are still pregnant with the spirit of animosity against their fellow Southerners! Their hearts are full of aversion towards others! These are the people who will most likely cause hullabaloos and turmoil in the South when the South gets it full autonomous status.

There are some tribes also complaining that since the war broke out in the South in 1983, they did not rule! Look at these poor people! They are thinking of ruling in state of thinking of now peace has come, what are we supposed to do in order to render quality services to our destitute people? They have no minds that think in this absolute manner!

I am speaking here specifically of Western Bahr El-Ghazal State (WBGS) with its capital Wau! There are some tribes in Wau who complain that they want to rule, because they have not been ruling for the last 21 years of civil strife in the South, they say now time has come for them. Is it that the war is over and they want to cause chaos again in Wau apart from what happened in 1980s when Wau became a scene of carnage? Let these people think twice before they act!

My concern is not who to rule Western Bahr El-Ghazal during the Interim Period or after, but rather who is qualified, ready and humble enough to render qualitative services to all citizens of Bahr El-Ghazal and South Sudan without discriminatory attitude? Those who are thinking of ruling, this is a lesson for you to learn.

Even though some of your leaders talked to Dr. John Garang the Leader of SPLM/A that during this Interim Period they want to rule Wau, I believe Garang in his capacity as a Leader of SPLM/A has no authority to choose who becomes a Wali (Governor) for any state in the South, it is the people of the state to choose who are capable of the positions of leadership in their regions. This is my understanding of what leadership in the South must be.

Let us know that New Sudan does not need people who practice ethnic politics and use their tribal system for ruling people! The South belongs to all of us together! We have the voice to say how the South must be ruled and administered, all the sons and daughters of the South must be accorded equal opportunities for positions of leadership, but mindful that people are selected based on merits, qualifications, professionalism, experiences and faithfulness to public funds and goods.

I am making these points because in the South we have the experiences of embezzlement of public funds by people in the government, who enrich them selves with the money that supposed to serve all the people, but only for growing their stomachs, building nice houses and for sending their children to study in the best schools in Khartoum and abroad, while the people in whose name they act in the government suffer! This is a very sad experience in the South! This must stop this time!

To the SPLM/A and all those who fought in one way or another and the result of their struggle is felt today in terms of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) signed on Sunday, January 9, 2005 in Nairobi, Kenya and hopefully autonomy for the South after Six-Year-Interim Period. I would like to urge that let the issue of division of power not confuse us at the moment, especially during the Rumbek- South-South-Dialogue, where vital issues pertaining to the joie de vivre of the South supposed to be discussed.

In Khartoum now a days however, there micro debates among politicians, tribal leaders, intellectuals and even women that what will be the division of power like in the South? This is a crucial question, which needs people of rationality to cogitate upon it before making baseless judgments, and the result will be futile so to speak!

The wise question I grasped from one of the Southern intellectuals during family talks on some topical issues was, “now that the South is ours, why because we fought together and we have brought peace together, the remaining issue is how division of power, wealth is and resources- the 52 % of the South stipulated in the Peace Protocols going to be divided among the people of the South”? I was some how puzzled when that elderly man talked with sense of humor. I thought he was creating a joke, but I came to realize that he was meaning his words!

By the way this is a very question that needs the contributions of every Southerner, the answer to this question must come from all of us (we who are Southerners) who suffered humiliation and marginalization in the hands of the Arab-Muslim-North! This time let us not allow those who are Arabs-in-Black-Skin again mistreat us! Such issues raise above could give rise to another bloodbath in the South, which will so to say be an over-the-top reality in the history of the New Sudan we are dreaming of living happy life in!

Let us jabber less and do more for the profitability of the South, let us stop disagreement amongst us, and work for the construction of the New Sudan with new understanding of fraternity, solidarity and “the right man or woman in the right place to do the right things at the right time” be a philosophy that will guide us along as we triumphantly re-build our beloved South Sudan that was dilapidated by the war, leaving us like orphans!

What I have written here is a reminder to all of us, let us start thing seriously and acting on the questions raised and give our views with respect to the same. It is my hope that the Rumbek-South-South-Dialogue will be a reality and strong resolutions that will come out from there should be for the well-being of the South. Let us give our support to it, and encourage our brothers and sisters who will be coming from USA, Canada, UK, Europe and Australia to join in, make substantial contributions during the deliberations and think of coming back home to help re-construct the South. Long live Rumbek Conference, Long Live New Sudan, Long Live South Sudan and Long live SPLM/A the Liberation Struggle Movement! With homage


This article was published on; an internet forum edited by Ghassan Elkhatib, a Director of Jerusalem Media Communication Center, and Yossi Alpher of American/ Jewish Center. Hope you find it and interesting reading..

The Naivasha enigma

Robert O. Collins

On January 9, 2005 the government of Sudan and the Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement (SPLM) signed a peace agreement in Naivasha, Kenya, after 22 years of violent conflict that killed over two million southern Sudanese and displaced another six million. Make no mistake, this is an historic achievement concerning inscrutable and imponderable differences, the result of long and tortuous negotiations that could have failed at any moment without intense international pressure from the troika of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the stalwart Norwegians.

It was the vindication of Dr. John Garang, leader of the SPLM, who envisaged a new Sudan of unity in diversity in 1983, a conviction from which he has never deviated during two decades of military victories and defeats, revolts against his authority, and interminable negotiations with disingenuous Islamist members of the National Islamic Front (NIF). His consistency, determination, and patience have been rewarded. He is now on paper the most powerful man in the Sudan as first vice-president, president of the Southern Autonomous Government, and commander-in-chief of his own army.

The new Sudan will no longer be an Islamist state but a democratic “one Sudan regardless of race, religion, or tribe” in which the new South will have autonomy, retain its own army, receive 50 percent of Sudan’s oil revenues, and have the right to vote for secession after six years. Those who have worked so hard for so long to achieve this triumph deserve our heart-felt praise, but they have had neither the time nor the energy to realize what they have accomplished or how they achieved it. After the celebrations in the sober light of day the participants awoke to the fact that, in their focused determination to complete the Naivasha Agreement they had little or no understanding of reality in the southern Sudan.

What are the realities? No amount of rhetoric can overcome the fact that today the overwhelming numbers of southern Sudanese are open or “closet” separatists, including some within Garang’s SPLM National Leadership Council. This should come as no surprise after 150 years of slavery, discrimination, and racism by northern Sudanese and, since independence, too many promises broken and millions dead or driven from their homes. Moreover, there is a large body of silent northerners who are quite prepared to let the South go its own way. For, indeed, southerners are different, often despised, and not about to become Arabs and Muslims, so it’s time the two million unwanted southern refugees milling around Khartoum went home.

Among the European and the United States governments there is an accepted folklore that the southern Sudan does not have the necessary educated and experienced individuals to administer the new South. This is undoubtedly true, but it is a situation the international community has pledged to rectify by massive infusions of cash and personnel to help. And if the past is any prophet of the future, after winning a measure of autonomy at Addis Ababa in 1972 the southern Sudanese enjoyed themselves immensely managing or mismanaging their affairs, and see no reason not to try again on their own. During the six years before the promised referendum this enthusiasm for independence will be hard to contain despite the anticipated attempts by any northern government to subvert it.

The key to the success of the unified new Sudan, however, is not the evolution of a separatist movement in the new South, but the reception and acceptance of a large number of hitherto despised southerners by the northern Sudanese. Naivasha guaranteed that southerners would receive 30 percent of the executive and legislative seats in the government of north Sudan, 12 percent more than in the elected central government of 1958.

In 1958 the southern representatives were ill-educated, inexperienced, and naive. Some were fooled, most were bought. It is doubtful that the southern Sudanese veterans of war, political infighting within the SPLM, and years of negotiations with Islamists, supported by the educated and successful southern elite in the diaspora, will be bought or betray their constituents a second time around. The new southern politician, however, will soon perceive that his future lies in being a member of the independent government of the South and not as “minister of cows” in Khartoum.

Perhaps the greatest enigma of Naivasha is the seeming willingness by the leadership of the National Congress Party (formerly NIF) to abandon the Islamist state and the ideology upon which it was founded of converting all Sudanese into Arabs and Muslim fundamentalists. Many have long wondered at the incongruity of the professed policies of the Islamist government to transform multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic, multi-religious Sudan into an Arab nation run by Salafist militant Muslims, a policy whose current manifestation is disaster in Darfur.

Are the Sudanese Islamists ready to abandon their ideology, their mission, and above all their power in return for a united, democratic Sudan, or is it to be just more of the same tactics of give-and-take, stonewalling and prevarication that have characterized their governance during the past 16 years? That is the Naivasha enigma.- Published 10/2/2005 (c)

Robert O. Collins is professor of history emeritus at the University of California Santa Barbara. He first went to the Sudan in 1956 and has since written extensively on the Sudan, the Southern Sudan, and the Nile.

More Dr. John Garang’s Speech on You-Tube

By Will RossBBC News, Juba

Women from a cultural dance troupe parade through Juba, the capital of soon-to-be independent South Sudan, on July 8, 2011,

The excitement of South Sudan’s independence is not confined to the new capital, Juba.

“July the ninth means a lot to me. When we were ruled by Khartoum there was no education for our children. We want to rule ourselves,” boomed Paul Modi, the chief of Loi village – a small fishing community on the banks of the River Nile.

On the radio was a song praising those who fought during the lengthy civil war.

The chief’s little dance went up a gear when John Garang’s name rang out.

Things are changing and even the road is okay so we can sell our fish in Juba”

Chief Paul Modi

The man who led the South Sudanese rebels died in 2005 but his portrait still hangs in many offices, shops and homes.

“We used to carry fish on our heads to Terakeka town or we used our wooden dug-out canoes but now we see motor boats,” said Chief Paul Modi as he showed me the reed hut where fish are dried to a crisp above a wood-fired oven.

“Things are changing and even the road is okay so we can sell our fish in Juba. In a few years we will see a lot of industries here.”

Men and women marched through the dusty streets of Terakeka singing: “I will never leave my land till I die.”

A much repeated chorus throughout the decades of civil war.

Women by the River Nile in JubaSouth Sudan has little infrastructure, but much potential

They came to a halt and then a man brought his mobile phone to the front, held it up and out came the opening bars of the latest hit.

Hands on hearts they belted out the anthem for the new nation.

“Our parents and grandparents were suffering for so long because of war. They brought us independence and so I thank them and I thank God,” secondary school student Sarah Keji told me.

Expectations here are high and the wish list is as long as the Nile.

“After independence, life will be better than before. We are going to see justice, prosperity and our country will develop,” she said.

Confiscated machetes

But for every optimist I have met in South Sudan I have bumped into many people, mostly visitors, predicting doom and gloom after independence.

South Sudan

Facts and figures:

  • Population: 7.5-9.7 million
  • Size: 619,745 sq km (239,285 sq miles), larger than Spain and Portugal combined
  • Major languages: English, Arabic (both official), Juba Arabic, Dinka
  • Religion: Traditional and a Christian minority
  • Main export: Oil

Challenges ahead:

  • One of world’s least developed countries: Worst maternal mortality rate; most children below 13 not in school; 84% of women are illiterate
  • Relations with Sudan: Dividing debts and oil; border disputes; citizenship
  • Security: At least seven active rebel groups

Their argument has plenty of ammunition.

For starters the statistics are shocking:

  • One out of every seven children dies before their fifth birthday
  • South Sudan has one of the worst maternal mortality rates in the world
  • One out of seven women who become pregnant will probably die from pregnancy-related causes
  • More than half of children between the ages of six and 13 are not in formal education
  • 84% of women cannot read or write. Only 6% of girls who start school ever finish.

Then there are the internal conflicts in South Sudan – armed rebellions and clashes over cattle which have killed more than 1,500 people this year.

Two years ago I drove north of Juba through Terakeka County past burnt villages and camps for people displaced by inter-ethnic violence.

Now this area is far more peaceful thanks to a disarmament exercise – a staggering 10,000 guns were collected in this county alone.

Ahead of the independence celebrations the army went on house-to-house searches.

“We can take no chances because when people celebrate many will get drunk and they can fight,” Terakeka County commissioner Clement Maring Samuel told me, standing beside a large stack of confiscated machetes, spears, bows, arrows and one gun from the 1940s.

Northern and Southern officers hug during a farewell party on 7 July 2011Peace depends on the north-south relationship after the divorce

He has big dreams, which depend on peace.

“We are reserving this area for hotels which will have a spectacular view,” he said as we stood beside a mango grove looking out over the River Nile.

“Terakeka will become a second Juba. We have the river, very fertile land and this area even has oil deposits and iron ore,” said Mr Samuel.

Saturday 9 July sees the birth of two new nations, not just one.

You could argue the north will be more precarious than the south, given the anger with the Sharia-focused government amongst a growing number of marginalised communities in the north.

For there to be peace in South Sudan depends to a great extent on the relationship between the two after the divorce.

Right now the signs are not good with tension along the oil-rich border.

“Life in South Sudan is likely to be precarious for some years to come,” says Sudan expert and academic Douglas Johnson.

“As long as the main priority of the government of South Sudan is maintaining security, especially along the border region, the less it will be able to focus on delivering the types of services and development the populace expects,” he says.

I would not be surprised if South Sudan became the next Eritrea”

Sudan watcher

With 75% of the known oil deposits in the south, the Khartoum government’s economy is about to be hit hard.

The oil-rich border has still not been demarcated so fighting for control of the oil fields is still a possibility, although the Khartoum government would then be taking on a recognised nation.

“After 9 July any conflict with South Sudan will no longer be an internal matter, but an international one, against a nation recognised by its neighbours and a member of international organisations,” Mr Johnson pointed out.

Although agriculture has great potential here, more than 95% of the southern government’s revenue comes from oil.

For now it all flows north so the relationship needs to be good.

Returnee confidence

But the mistrust and suspicion run deep.

“It is only a small clique in Khartoum that is running things,” said John Garang’s son, Mabior Garang De-Mabior.

“And as long as that clique remains in Khartoum, the marginalised people in the north will not be safe and the independence of southern Sudan will not be safe because of the nature of the beast that we are dealing with.”

Some Sudan watchers believe that even if Khartoum does not make life hard for the south, the southerners themselves could very well make a mess of it on their own.

A woman cleans a portrait of the late SPLM leader John Garang at his memorial in JubaThe late John Garang is seen as the father of South Sudan

Just as the country is trying to get on its feet, alarm bells are already sounding over corruption, tribalism and signs of autocratic rule.

One long time Sudan watcher put it this way: “I would not be surprised if South Sudan became the next Eritrea.”

In the context of our people’s history there has been no better time or opportunity”

Mabior Garang De-MabiorJohn Garang’s son

In 1993 Eritreans voted overwhelmingly for independence. Now the nation is seen as one of the most oppressive on the continent.

Behind the walls of John Garang International School in Juba there is evidence of confidence in the new nation from some of the wealthier southerners.

“I am getting many e-mails from South Sudanese living in the Netherlands, the US, Canada who say they will come back home after 9 July,” said Susan Magondu, the Kenyan principal at the $3,000 (£1,900) a year school.

“These are doctors and engineers asking me to, ‘Keep a place for my child,'” she says.

The question is how long the smiles will last after the party.

“I cannot predict whether it will be squandered or not. That will depend on us as a nation and what we do as a nation so I will leave that to history,” said Mabior Garang De-Mabior.

“I’m not saying it’s a well-oiled machine but in the context of our people’s history there has been no better time or opportunity.”

Sudan: A country divide
Satellite image showing geography of Sudan, source: Nasa

The great divide across Sudan is visible even from space, as this Nasa satellite image shows. The northern states are a blanket of desert, broken only by the fertile Nile corridor. South Sudan is covered by green swathes of grassland, swamps and tropical forest.

South Sudan's President Salva Kiir cuts the tape during the launch of new currency notes at the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba
South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir cuts the tape during the launch of new currency notes at the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba July 18, 2011. South Sudan started rolling out its new currency on Monday — the South Sudan Pound — escalating a point of simmering disagreement with Khartoum after the country split away from the north on July 9. REUTERS/Benedicte Desrus (SOUTH SUDAN –
South Sudan's President Salva Kiir receives new currency notes from a bank teller at the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba
South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir receives new currency notes from a bank teller at the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba July 18, 2011. South Sudan started rolling out its new currency on Monday — the South Sudan Pound — escalating a point of simmering disagreement with Khartoum after the country split away from the north on July 9. REUTERS/Benedicte Desrus (SOUTH SUDAN – Tags: BUSINESS POLITICS)
  • Freshly-minted notes of the new South Sudan pound, which picture the late South Sudanese independence leader John Garang. South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir has launched the country’s new currency and ordered government officials to repatriate funds, amid concerns about rampant corruption in the world’s youngest nation
  • South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir cuts the tape during the launch of new currency notes at the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba July 18, 2011. South Sudan started rolling out its new currency on Monday — the South Sudan Pound — escalating a point of simmering disagreement with Khartoum after the country split away from the north on July 9. REUTERS/Benedicte Desrus (SOUTH SUDAN – Tags: BUSINESS POLITICS)
  • An official leaves after a news conference presenting Sudan’s new currency at the Central Bank headquarters in Khartoum July 16, 2011. Sudan’s central bank said on Saturday it would begin circulating a new currency this month after South Sudan said it planned to create a currency of its own. REUTERS/Mohamed Nureldin Abdallah (SUDAN – Tags: POLITICS BUSINESS)
South Sudan's new currency carries the head of revered rebel leader John Garang
Freshly-minted notes of the new South Sudan pound, which picture the late South Sudanese independence leader John Garang. South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir has launched the country’s new currency and ordered government officials to repatriate funds, amid concerns about rampant corruption in the world’s youngest nation
A man from South Sudan displays new currency notes outside the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba
A man from South Sudan displays new currency notes outside the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba July 18, 2011. South Sudan started rolling out its new currency on Monday — the South Sudan Pound — escalating a point of simmering disagreement with Khartoum after the country split away from the north on July 9. REUTERS/Benedicte Desrus (SOUTH SUDAN – Tags: BUSINESS POLITICS IMAGES OF THE DAY)
  • South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir receives new currency notes from a bank teller at the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba July 18, 2011. South Sudan started rolling out its new currency on Monday — the South Sudan Pound — escalating a point of simmering disagreement with Khartoum after the country split away from the north on July 9. REUTERS/Benedicte Desrus (SOUTH SUDAN – Tags: BUSINESS POLITICS)
  • Freshly-minted notes of the new South Sudan pound, which picture the late South Sudanese independence leader John Garang. South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir has launched the country’s new currency and ordered government officials to repatriate funds, amid concerns about rampant corruption in the world’s youngest nation
  • South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir cuts the tape during the launch of new currency notes at the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba July 18, 2011. South Sudan started rolling out its new currency on Monday — the South Sudan Pound — escalating a point of simmering disagreement with Khartoum after the country split away from the north on July 9. REUTERS/Benedicte Desrus (SOUTH SUDAN – Tags: BUSINESS POLITICS)
  • An official leaves after a news conference presenting Sudan’s new currency at the Central Bank headquarters in Khartoum July 16, 2011. Sudan’s central bank said on Saturday it would begin circulating a new currency this month after South Sudan said it planned to create a currency of its own. REUTERS/Mohamed Nureldin Abdallah (SUDAN – Tags: POLITICS BUSINESS)
  • Men from South Sudan display new currency notes outside the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba
  • Men from South Sudan display new currency notes outside the Central Bank of South Sudan in Juba July 18, 2011. South Sudan started rolling out its new currency on Monday — the South Sudan Pound — escalating a point of simmering disagreement with Khartoum after the country split away from the north on July 9. REUTERS/Benedicte Desrus (SOUTH SUDAN – Tags: BUSINESS