Unfair Mentalities on the CPA

By James Okuk Solomon
(E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)
I have felt uneasy several times to find my mentality and that of other many Sudanese in mismatch with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). When I sit down and try to read and understand that document, I find myself in some dilemmas. Worst still, when I try to consult the media (print and electronic), I even get more confused. Resorting to public statements by some of the leaders who negotiated the CPA makes it even worse. What is the problem: Does it mean the CPA is failing to become an ownership of the people of Sudan? Or does it mean CPA was not negotiated genuinely by its leaders?

In my humble opinion, CPA is not comprehensive enough as it claims to be. It does not reflect the aspirations of all the Sudanese regions, apart from Southern Sudan, Southern Kordofan and Southern Blue Nile States, and Abyei Area. (Even the people of those two states and that one area, which falls outside the boundaries of Southern Sudan as they stood in 1/1/1956 are unsatisfied with the CPA dividends). The people of Eastern Sudan have their own agreement (EPA). The people of Western Sudan also have their agreement (DPA) or perhaps more in the future. This means whoever became a constitutional holder in reference to any of those Peace Agreements (PAs) represent only the power sharing of his area in the government. He/she has no authority to talk on behave of other areas except if mandated by the public office like the case of the Ambassador of Sudan in Washington who unfortunately named Darfur rebels ?terrorists? in his press conference that opposed US sanctions. It is not the business of any GoSS representative to disclaim the ambassador?s statement since those rebels are not under the jurisdiction of the South. It is not also the business of SPLM Party (to be registered yet) to protest unless it confirms those rebels to be its official members in the secretariat registry. It is only the GoNU, the Governments of Darfur States and their peoples or rebels, the AU and the UN who have the mandate to object to Ukech?s words.

Surprisingly enough, in their many statements (written and verbal), some emotional Southerners still claim that they are for the whole Sudan in the name of the ?New Sudan.? This was true before the CPA period but not after it: If some of their leaders assumed that there cannot be peace in the South without Peace in the East or the West of the Sudan why did they hurry for the CPA? They could have first united with other rebels in the East and West and negotiated peace with one inclusive position based on the New Sudan vision of freedom, equality, opportunity, democracy, justice, and human rights that is supposed to eliminate marginalization. But because they seemed to believe that there could be peace in some places even if there are wars in other parts of the Sudan, they abandoned the NDA, left alone the Darfur and Eastern Sudan rebels, and signed the CPA with the NCP/NIF dominated GoS in 2005.

Not only that, but some of the CPA negotiators who are in the government still go ahead to tell the Sudanese that nothing has changed and SPLM/A and GoS stands as before. But SPLM/A has become part of the current ruling government with all its levels. And it is constitutionally known that whoever is in the government is obliged to execute its business, otherwise it is fair to resign. So let SPLM-GoSS representative in Washington quit the post if doesn?t like to sing the song (like the Ambassador Ukech) since GoSS is a level of government and SPLM a party under the laws of the Sudan. Let him be sincere to his American Passport and not to pretend to be representing a part of Sudan or one of its political parties. Let him know that sincere opposition is the one done from without and not from within the government. My dear Sudanese (and particularly Southerners in the diaspora) let us learn to differentiate between the government, the party, and the individual. Let us also learn to draw their boundaries and the mandates. Otherwise we will get abashed with irrelevancy, inconsistency and arrogance that are unfair to the CPA.