Skip to content

Pachodo.org

Wednesday, 22nd May 2013

You are here: Home

Should Mr. Salva Sacrifice the Share of South to Please Americans for Darfur and Abyei?

Written/Submitted by James Okuk Solomon

Category: Pachodo.org Latest English Articles

Comments

Text Size

Should Mr. Salva Sacrifice the Share of South to Please Americans for Darfur and Abyei?

By James Okuk Solomon

0. INTRODUCTION:
Salva Kiir

With due respect to all my leaders who are mentioned in this article, and with due loyalty to the truth for freedom, I am convinced to write as follows: The CPA politics examination is failing many SPLM leaders like Secretary-General, H.E. Pagan Salva Kiir

Amum, the GONU Minister of Cabinet Affairs, H.E. Deng Alour, the National Assemby Deputy Speaker, Hon. Atem Garang, the GOSS Minister of Presidential Affairs, H.E. Dr. Luka Biong, and other VIPs in the Sudan government (National, Southern, States and Local).

The Southern Sudan Joshua (with the four accumulated hats), H.E., Hon., and C-in-C of SPLA, Lt.Gen. Mr. Salva Kiir Mayardit is almost leading the list of the failures. Their answer to the above-mentioned question has been "Yes". This "Yes" has entrapped them to be looked at as unpatriotic and traitors because they have agreed to sell the sovereignty of the Sudan to the pressuring American peoples and government. Their supporting argument seems to look like this: "we should not bite the hand that feeds us. Americans have helped us to realize the CPA as our strength to get hold of the NCP. We must obey them and do our politics as they want it - they dislike NCP and so should we. They hate Mr. President Al-Basir and so should we, they are against H.E Dr. Lam and so should we etc..." But why should the politics of SPLM be remotely controlled by the big world power? For how long will America puppeteer this baby party and the GoSS? When will this party be allowed to learn to crawl on its own and become mature to compete self-reliantly in order to confidently go to the palace by people's ballots rather than soldiers bullets?

1. THE DARFUR PROBLEM:

History of Darfur is historically that of the struggle between the settled African farmers and the roaming Arab and African nomads. At the beginning of the 17^th Century His Majesty Suleiman Solong Dungo founded the Fur Kingdom around Jabel Mara, a volcanic maintain range which was well naturally watered and fertiled. The Arabs entered the Sudan and made the indigenous of Darfur to adopted Islam. Then came the Keira Dynasty or Fur Sultanate with the capital in El Fasher. They got involved in the lucrative slave trade. They raided the Non-Muslim black tribes to the South (Kordofan, Bahr El Ghazal, etc.) for slaves harvest and sent them north to Egypt along the Forty Days Road for the market. St. Bakhita was one of the slave victims who became a saintly victor when she got the opportunity to fall at the hand of good Italian Christian Catholics. It was until 1874 that the famous Northerner Slave businessman, Zubeir Pasha, sent an army to Darfur. He overthrew the Fur Sultan and handed the territory to the Egyptian Khadive in return for slaves gathering licence. Darfur was invaded again by armies of the Mahadi. Its Egyptian-Turkish governor, the Australian Rudolf Slatin Pasha, became the Mahadi's hostage. But After the defeat of the Mahadist by the Anglo-Egyptian expeditions, His Majesty Ali Dinar restored the Fur Sultanate with tacit British approval. He ruled from El Fasher and maintained peace and order by controlling the nomads to not raid the farmers. However, when H.M. Dinar opted to support Ottomans in World War I, the British acted against him by sending two planes from the Proto-Royal Air Force, which shot him dead from the air. The Anglo-Egyptian condominium rule then placed Darfur under native administration with the help of British officials.

At the independence of Sudan in 1956, Darfur became marginalized. In 1970s - 1980s the area was stroked by draught and famine as a result of global warming and desertification. Water and green pastures became a problem, making the Arabs and Zaghawa nomads to clash with the Fur and Masalit Farmers. This crisis was politicized by the central government in Khartoum (especially H.E Sadiq Al-Mahadi and H.E. Al-Bashir) for power gains. They associated Islam with Arabism to justify their opportunistic move by arming intensively the Janjaweeds. The Non-Muslims Darfurians were discriminated, prosecuted, subjected to evil treatments (raids, destruction of farms, burning of villages) and all kinds of terror that leds to their displacement. Most of them became desperate that they accepted to be recruited in SAF and Popular Defence Force to be sent to Southern Sudan for the Holy War against infidel Christians and Animists, and to stop SPLM/A opening a front in Darfur in 1991. The Darfurians were merciless to the Southerners and SPLM/A more than the Arabs (e.g. abductions, rapes, village burnings, mass killings, and all evil practices) because of the high blood pay they got from Khartoum for that dirty job. In 2003 SLA and JEM rebel movements (through the help of outsiders who hate Khartoum and support of those who make profits from war business) were officially launched to fight militarily for the rights of Fur, Masalit, Zaghawa, and all the Darfurians who realized that they were marginalized in wealth, power and security sharing of the country. The government became mad with them and intensified military and militia operations (Air and land) without discrimination of the civilians, among whom the rebels were hiding for tactical moves. This resulted in mass killings and their displacement to less hostile areas within Darfur, in other areas of Northern Sudan, and at the borders of Chad and Central Africa. The international community became outraged and threaten Khartoum with pressures, sanctions and other plan ?Bs' and ?Cs' if they continue with that destructive war, which UN termed as the worst of the world humanitarian crisis.

The 2005 IGAD South-North CPA gave a hope as a model for resolving Darfur problems. AU with the help of USA took the initiative to mediate between the Darfurian rebels and the GOS. In 2006, they came up with DPA, which instead of resolving the problem on the ground, exacerbated it by making the rebels to split into many groups - some accepting to come to Khartoum to participate in GONU. Based on the DPA, AU was mandated to send its first peacekeeping operation to the area. The war continued and those AU forces were incapable of protecting civilians because of lack of logistics. America who was the mastermind of the DPA, instead of pressuring the rebels who refused to join the deal, resorted to assisting and encouraging them to negotiate with the government from afresh. H.E. Mr. President Al-Bashir became furious and opted to flash the tough-headed rebels out of Darfur by intensive military operation. He redirected most of the SAF forces who were withdrawn from the South for that operation. Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan became irritated and moved a motion which resulted in resolution 1706 for using UN military force in Darfur, even without consent of Sudan government. Before that he lobbied hard with the Americans and Europeans to convince African Head of States to reject Mr. President Al-Bashir to assume AU Chairmanship, despite the luxurious costly receptions and accommodations he accorded them in Khartoum during the submit. Mr. Annan also lobbied with International Criminal Court to write an arrest warrant to some top Sudanese government officials, a case which was rejected by Mr. President and the Minister of Justice for the reason that Sudan is not a signatory to that body.

Mr. President Al-Bashir vowed to divorce his wife if UN foreign forces stepped into Darfur under chapter seven. Notwithstanding, his temper was cooled down by the diplomacy of the new UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Mon through the competent diplomatic negotiation of H.E. Dr. Lam Akol, the Foreign Minister of the Sudan. With understanding, they negotiated for UN intervention under Chapter eight for first time in UN history. The concept of AU-UN hybrid forces was invented for the first time in history of humankind and an agreement was reached to send them to Darfur after the blessings of the UN legislative body. American government are still suspicious about the success of this agreement because it has become stereotyped in them that the government of the Sudan is unreliable in honouring agreements (but which agreements; international or locals?). H.E. Ki-Mon wrote for the G.8 submit that the global warming, desertification, draught and environmental degradation is the root cause of Darfur problem, and that the whole world must find a way of resolving this situation with the new technology and modernization. This made Mr. President Al-Bashir very happy because he also believes that what Mr. Ki-Mon has said is exactly what his government has been telling the deaf international community for so long. He accepted to cooperate more with the UN as long as the AU-UN hybrid forces abstain from infringing on the sovereignty of the Sudan and its army.

As a Foreign Minister of the Sudan, Dr. Lam Akol is obliged by the constitution and the discipline of his office to convey the foreign policy of the Sudan as guided and supervised by the president. (See Interim Constitution, Ch.II, 17(2) and CPA, Part II, 2.9). Though he is a Southerner who got that authority through the SPLM ticket for the power sharing of Southerners in the GONU, he has to represent the Sudan national interest in international and bilateral relations and not his party's (SPLM) or region's. This means that if the president say UN Force should not come to Darfur, the Foreign Minister should say it too even if it displeases his party and friends. And if the president changes his position by accepting UN peacekeeping operation to come to Darfur, he should also change his position and say they should. If the president says that genocide did not happened in Darfur the Foreign Minister should say the same. This norm is the same anywhere in the world. For example, when USA invaded Iraq, H.E. Collen Powel has to parrot whatever Mr. President Bush said about the presence of biological or chemical weapons of mass destruction in that innocent country (and it seems they meant president Saddam to be the targeted weapons himself). Why does USA continue to fool SPLM leadership to force the Foreign Minister to contradict his President if they are really honest in their watch for CPA implementation, which authorizes the Foreign Minister to uphold the confidence of his president? Why do SPLM leaderships pretend to call Mr. AL-Bashir their president if they are more loyal to American president than to him? Why did they take a constitutional oath before him; promising to safeguard the national sovereignty and interest of the Sudan if they are his opposition? Why did they sign the CPA to join the government and abandon being rebels like the movements of Darfur? Why did SPLM and NCP sign CPA in order to resort at treating themselves as enemies rather than partners in the implementation process?

In my critical opinion H.E. Dr. Lam did not do any thing wrong to the government to deserve the rumoured reshuffle, whose list is said to have been presented to the president by Mr. Salva before he left for China. Dr. Lam was not involved in any corrupt practices or is he suspected of any embezzlement of public fund. He has been confidence, efficient and successful with his national duties. He did a lot of service to the South by employing over fifteen ambassadors and over sixty diplomats from the sons and daughters of Southern Sudan, a thing which has never been done by any GONU minister who got into the government through SPLM ticket. Even the First Vice President, Mr. Kiir has not employed southerners in the capital palace according to the CPA quotas. H.E. Dr. Lam is the only minister who implemented part of the CPA which concerns Foreign affairs quotas for Southerners. History will reward him if the hatred-blinded elements of SPLM and southern Sudanese fail to acknowledge this effort. To sacrifice him in order to please Americans for the case of Darfur is a big mistake Mr. President Kiir is about to commit if the reshuffling rumours are true. Worst still to replace him with an Arab like Hon. Dr. Munsour Khalid, even if he is a committed comrade of SPLM is a sell-out of the share of Southerners in GONU. Not only that, but Dr. Monsour has already been a Minister Foreign Relations long ago and it would look selfish if he puts his picture there twice to squeeze the chances of a young enthusiastic Sudanese getting along well with a new style of diplomacy. If I were Dr. Munsour I will take the example of Prof. Francis Deng, who gave a way for new young Ambassadors to take his place when his named appeared in the SPLM list. Hon. Dr. Munsour should turn down this offer unless he is happy with ?gerontocracy' or rule by the over-aged). If he is the presidential advisor now, should he accept to be demoted by Mr. Salva by letting him to be advised by Hon. Dr. Mustafa Ishmael who is now the presidential advisor for Foreign Affairs?

Let it be noted well that the CPA wealth and Power Sharing is mainly between the South and the North, with SPLM given bigger share to divide among the Southerners and NCP given another bigger half to share among Northerners, including the people of Darfur, Eastern Sudan and Abyei. The war ended in the South because the Southerners got satisfied by the share for the interim period. If at all Mr. Salva and his cronies are envious about Dr.Lam's successful mission in that ministry, and have closed their minds (perhaps of conditional Americans promise to fund SPLA) to remove him from there, they should replace him with a southerner. (By southerner here I do not include any person from Abyei because he does not yet belongs to the South. (Politicians like H.E. Deng Alour, H.E. Dr. Luka Biong, and Hon. Edward Lino will not qualify there). Within the tribal calculation in the South, like what Mr. President Salva did with the GoSS Minister of Finance (Arthur Akwein) when he replaced him with a man from the same Dinka identity from the same Area, he should replace - if at all he insist to remove - Dr. Lam with a Collo (Shilluk) Man. There are so many of them who are qualified to do that job. He should not pretend to be non-tribalistic when it comes to a position held by a Collo politician. If he ignores this and went for an Arab or a non-collo politician to fill the post, he should be assured of losing Collo and Dr. Lams Supporters and friends votes in the coming general elections ballots. Even the King of the Shilluk would not agree that any of his sons in the government loses a crucial post in the government (Leader Dr. Lam as Foreign Minister, Leader Mr. Pagan as Secretary-General, Leader Oyay Deng as Chief of SPLA Genersl Staff, and leader Mr. Alfred Akwoc as Undersecretary). These sons of Collo are our rare icons and whoever is going to temper with their positions without any justifiable criminal activity is burning his political chances in the Collo Kingdom and within Collo communities anywhere. This statements sounds as endorsement of tribalism but they are in context with the unconstitutional and un-institutional politics which is being played by the leadership of SPLM who is almost deciding to raw the boat without wider consultation and consent of his colleagues as to where the direction should be, and by which means to reach it!!!!!

2. ABYEI PROBLEM:

The problem of the delay of the ABC and Abyei Area Administration, which falls under the presidency, is due to the mistake of experts' report, which overstepped the mandated historical year of 1905. Shall the South go back to war because of Abyei stalemate? Shall attracting Southerners for Unity of the Sudan or Separation be halt by the problem of Abyei? What I understand is that the stalemate of implementation of Abyei protocol is neither a mistake of SPLM nor NCP nor the government; it is an error created by the so-called experts who compiled the report hurriedly without checking its compliance with the CPA articles. Those experts went with a lot of dollars that could have improved the life of the poor residents of Abyei area. In spite of their big pay, they proved to be inexperts by leaving the mess, which still haunts the Naivasha partners for a year now! If SPLM is really a party which does not entertain marginalization, it should include Misseriya and other non-Ngok Dink residents in the administration of Abyei area as stipulated in the CPA and Sudan Interim National Constitution. If SPLM is really for peace, it should encourage dialogue and harmony between the residents of that area as they use to live peacefully and cooperatively long ago. Any attempt to implant spirit of discrimination in that area will fuel the problem and scratch the old scars, which are supposed to be healed and buried by peace and reconciliation language. Abyei people who are in the government of Southern Sudan should start to think to go to their proper place which has been determined by the CPA. They should either be in the Presidency, the GONU or in the legislative, judiciary and executive interim administration of their area until they determine their identity whether they are Southerners or Northerners at the end of the six year of the interim period.(see CPA, Ch. IV, 1, 2). The South is supposed to be ruled by the Southerners and people like Hon. Dr. Luka Biong and Mr. Arob Mayak are right peoples in the wrong places. How could Dr. Luka Biong be the Minister of the GoSS presidential affairs when he is not yet a Southerner if Southerners are really keen? He should be a Minister in the national presidency instead of the GOSS. Southerners should not sympathize with them simply because they are Dinka. Their grandfathers have decided to identify them as Northerners by bringing them from Bahr El Gkazal to Kordofan territory. Yes, they contributed effectively to the struggle of SPLM/A but the CPA has fairly given them their share in Abyei and they should not enjoy double privileges. For example, can Abyei people allow Equatorian, Nuer, and other Southern politician to be included in the Abyei Area Administration? To say every time that NCP and government are reneging on the CPA implementation is a sign of weakness from SPLM leadership. It shows that they are not able to adjust to the new reality of peace language, and be in control of the country's politics. This continuous cry puts a question mark whether SPLM would reliably manage Sudan government business if given people's votes in the coming general election. Surely, this baby cry makes Ummaparty, who are uncomfortable with the right of Self-determination and many articles in the CPA, very happy!!!!

3. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

H.E. Salva Kiir is our leader and we should not rejoice if we see him getting enlisted amongst the poor scorers of the CPA examinations. For him to avoid failure, I recommend that he empowers his negotiation and influence skills for resolving burning issues and problems through wider consultation with his colleagues in the presidency, in the GoSS, in the SPLM party and in SLPA, according to the constitutional powers and institutional channels. He should not attempt to sacrifice the interests of the South in the CPA's lion share to please the Americans or any international pressure monsters for the sake of Darfur and Abyei. More than half a century has been wasted in the South with war business and it is time for the Southerners to busy themselves with peaceful sustainability and development. China will never come to invest in the South if SPLM leaders continue to use the language of animosity and threats in their current politics.

H.E. Salve should never attempt to remove Dr. Lam in the Foreign Ministry without evaluating him on his constitutional and institutional duty records: Is he excelling his right duties? Does he defend the interest of the Sudan and its sovreignty? He should not evaluate him on American interests: Is America please with him? If he shifts him to the Ministry of Investment without his consent, then he should expect that the investment for the South will be directed to the benefit of the Collo Kingdom so as not to continue losing out in the tribalistic calculations. If he is not appreciated when he does a good work for all the Southerners, then he should not waste his energy taking investment opportunities to Awiel or Gogrial or Abyei. Instead, Mr. Salva should appoint a Collo Minister in GOSS to bridge the missing representation there.

According to CPA and the Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan, the South should be governed by Southerners. This is evidence in the contents of the constitutional oaths taken by the ministers, parliamentarians and all other constitutional holders in GoSS. Therefore, Mr. Salva should remove the None-Southerners in any GoSS business if he really wants to respect the rule of law. If he ignores this recommendation, he should be prepared for the fateful future of his political career. The streets will be happy to welcome him after the coming general elections because the majority of the Collo peoples, their friends and allies, and all grievanced southerners are not going to waste their votes on him. He will never taste the sweetness of politics again; neither will he be in the army any more.

But if he considers those recommendations, then Collo people and all the satisfied Southerners will support and endorse his leadership by making him win the ballots in the coming general elections so that he continues enjoying the sweat luxurious leadership privileges. Leaders are made and I will be joyful to make Mr. Salva if he acts on my humble critical insights.

Long lives the interest of Southern Sudan with any party and leaders who do not temper to sell out Southerners' shares in order to please Non-Southerners!!!!

James Okuk Solomon is a PhD young Student in the area of Political Philosophy in the University of Nairobi. He can be reached on This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.