South Sudanese Fundraising Party in Anchorage City of Alaska State.

By Khak Banguot

South Sudanese Fundraising Party in Anchorage City of Alaska State.(Photo: supplied)

South Sudanese Fundraising Party in Anchorage City of Alaska State.(Photo: supplied)

October 23, 2014(Nyamilepedia) – A week ago, South Sudanese community in Alaska had a fund raising party in support of the Nuer survivors and victims of 15th Dec. 2013 genocide which took placed in Juba South Sudan targeting the Nuer population with their families.

Families of the humiliated Nuer victims gathered in Anchorage city to extend their financial support to the most needy Nuer families back in South Sudan of which many of them are either residing in the Neighboring Countries Refugees camps, UNIMESS or are IDPs within the country.

The event was gracefully blessed with participation of EX MP Hon. Sophia Pal Gai, who was the guest of honor and the patron of the event. The party had attracted all South Sudanese community from all walks of life from faith based groups, Elders, women, youth, Students, Business community, as well as friends of South Sudan. This was the third time the community is conducting fund raising activities in support of the community back home.

Emotions, bitterness and tears filled the spirit of those present remembering their murdered love ones, relatives and friends who were killed, victimized, humiliated, or destroyed in the eve of Dark nights and Days in juba starting from Dec.15th -20th 2013, where thousands of innocent lives were lost without apparent logical reasons.

A fabricated pretext of attempted Coup was explained by the Kiir’s government, the story had been refuted by the world leaders that it was a lie, however, the genesis of this conflict was perceived to be political issue within the ruling Party SPLM but the perpetuators turned it so tribal so that Nuer individuals are killed under the bloody hands of security personnel ordered by the President Kiir, this action had significantly showed lack of good leadership within Government leading to a failed state and a suppression of democracy.

The event started with a word of prayers followed by the National Anthem and a one minute observance of silence in remembrance of all the fallen innocent victims who were victimized because of their ethnicity, culture and were undignified buried in mass graves or left for the dogs to feed on.

As the event continued, few recognized individuals were given speeches to encourage the community as such they urged the IGAD mediators to listen to the voices of ordinary people who demand peace in the country, they said all the root causes pertaining to the current civil war be addressed in IGAD let peace process, they would like to see an adoption of federal system of governance within a permanent constitution, they want to see a total Democratic transformation in all government institutions including the security, a transformation of the SPLM party, a unified transitional government with structures of responsibilities which will conduct fresh elections within specific time frame, not forgetting aspect of national reconciliations and healing while strongly recommend an accountability and justice be taken against the perpetuators of this horrific genocide.

Hon. Sophia who was the guest of honor, encouraged the community to rally behind a visionary leader who will take South Sudan forward and have plans for a better South as the current leader Salva Kiir failed to take the country forth, she said we need a leader that will respect and accommodate all diverse cultures within the country, removing tribal politics and use the constitution for the welfare of every citizen, stating that tribal leadership has been practiced by Kiir’s regime to the highest order when he first killed the Murle people than killed the Nuer people in the name of a Coup, imposing war against the will of people causing unnecessary suffering to the people of South Sudan, she called upon the people to unite as South Sudanese community worldwide regardless of the tribe they come from since God is the one who created all tribes in South Sudan, we’ve existed as people of South Sudan and will always do, we need peace within ourselves and forgive each others.

She said as People of South Sudan, we should not hate all Dinka brothers ro sisters, they are not all bad, that’s why Dr. Riek Machar has Dinka in The SPLM Leadership council Structures, these people are standing with us and with the truth, they want to see Democratic reforms in the Country, they didn’t like what President Kiir was doing against Nuer people, we have to know that some Dinkas are also suffering under Kiir administration, that’s why they were five members from Dinka community who were imprison by Kiir and now representing the SPLM Leaders as Former SPLM Political Detainees out of 11.

Sophia concluded her speech by saying that let the blood of all murdered victims of Nuers community be remembered for total democratic transformation of the Country so that no more dictator be allow to hail as a President again. She also urged the people to advocate only for a Just Peace so that the country is back to truck in the path of development and progress.

Finally Hon. Sophia encouraged the people to study hard so as to be used in future as the seed of reconstruction of the South after it has been destroyed by a regime that imposed the current war on people, corrupt entity with poor leadership style. The party managed to secure a considerable amount of funds to be sent back home in support of the Nuer families and victims. The organizing team distributed awards to few individuals who have working tirelessly in the community since the eruption of the conflict in December 2013.

Best regards

Khak Banguot

Chairperson of South Sudan crisis management team

Anchorage Alaska.

A Call for Worldwide Mourning Demonstration

By Zechariah James Machar

Opinion No: 03

Source: Zee Machar/Nyamilepedia

Source: Zee Machar/Nyamilepedia

October 24, 2014(Nyamilepedia) — Before I start my argument I want to inform all my readers that the subject of today’s article is built in facts and experience, please carefully read with open heart. By the end of this article I expect you to make note of sufficient tips that will help you monitor rival discussion concerning the Mourning demonstration campaign.

In December 15, 2013 Salva Kiir and his supporters strike for the release of the angel of death which resulted in slaughtering of more than 20,000 Nuer civilians in the country’s capital Juba. President Kiir who masters the killing of Nuer and South Sudanese violated the country’s transitional constitution and deserve to be ousted.

  • President Kiir lied under-oath by creating a fabricating coup in order to eliminate those who are aspiring for the leadership of the Sudan People Liberation Movement (SPLM) party – ARTICLE 99.
  • Under president Kiir’s administration South Sudan has never been calm since the independent; after July 2011 emerge the massacre of Murle tribe in 2012-2013 than follows by the cleansing of Nuer civilians in Juba – ARTICLE 53 SUB (1).
  • President Kiir invited foreign forces to exterminate certain ethnic group in the country without the national legislature’s approval which legalized the racial execution and crimes against humanity – ARTICLE 103 SUB (2).
  • Traditional chief (Sultan) Kiir recruited over 3,000 presidential own private army from his clan who conducted the December 15 door to door slaughtering – ARTICLE 151 SUB (33).

There are other numerous articles that can guarantee president Kiir’s removal yet today’s article focuses on mourning demonstration campaign.

Demonstration is a public meeting or stride protesting against something or expressing views on political issue. Today I am here to introduce you a new method of demonstration where silence and rising of placard is optimum. Since the outset of 2010, African and Arab countries are in chaos, government don’t dare to permit any clamor public rally that’s why a mute mourning demonstration must be arranged in commemoration of December fifteenth’s deceases.

As we mobilize and prepare the outfit of the demonstration we will meet three different personalities who will constantly try to turn down the well organized turnout.


The bribe elders and friends: these are the people who received certain amount of money from Kiir’s government in order to mobilize and monitor Kiir’s critic’s activities; their persuading tactics are:

  • Security: Demonstration security is their major obstacle; they will try to convince you that you cannot compare your residing African or Arab country with Western world where freedom of expression is respected.
  • Isolation: This is an old time trick used by ancient enemies to divide people into countries (in case there are foreigners), states, counties, districts, and families to guarantee their dissociation. The bribe elder will use this trick in form of advice to segregate the demonstration organizers.
  • Sudden alignment: In this phase the bribe elders strategically utilize telephone calls and special visit to gently criticize the demonstration operators. They will privately remain you of your personal duties to coax you to disown the protest. “Sudden relationship is a way of fooling people and a ploy to hijack an idea.”
  • Bribery: Kiir’s government agents will wisely answer your financial needs as a means of transportation, gifts, and date. “An intelligent way to bribe a wise man is by showing sympathy”
  • Intimidation: This is the stage where the bribe elders will try to frighten you using phone calls claiming to be security agents or someone who lost his entire family just for being an activist.


The elders and friends with pride are the people who isolated themselves and call themselves community intellectuals; they are popularly known to be former community leaders. They oppose the demonstration because they do not own the idea, that’s means they wanted the protest idea to derive from them for people to praise them and give them the credibility of being creative.


The scared elders and friends are those who experienced the war and they are psychologically controlled by fear. They will share with you their terror imagination and try to convince you that you are too young to publicly disclose your objections. Unfortunately; we should not blame them for self and community-destructive because they are intentionally clear and sincere, their problem is the chronic fear that took over their braveness and master their mind functioning but watch out or you will be influence.

Location of demonstration

After studying several locations, I ultimately came up with three places to determine the convenient location to hold your protest in the country of resident.

  • United Nation office: The UN is an intergovernmental organization established on October 24, 1945 to promote international co-operation. The organization was created following the Second World War to prevent another such conflict. At its time founding, the united nation had 51 members’ states; there are now 193. Their objective is to help countries torn by conflict find sustainable peace. It will be an excellent choice to hold your protest at the UN office. The United Nation is fully authorize to mediate and brings an end to international issues, just as they did to Muamar Muhammad Abu Minyar Al-Gaddafi of Libya when they called in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to terminate the world dictator according to their point of view.
  • African Union office: The AU is an amalgamation of African head of states that was founded on May 26, 2001 in Addis Ababa to replace the organization of African Unity – founded 25 May 1963. The vision of AU is an integrated, prosperous and peaceful African driven by its own citizens and representing a dynamic force in global arena. They mediate continental issues like the independent of Eritrea in 1993 and South Sudan in 2011. The AU can assist us removing Salva Kiir Mayardit, the 21st century dictator.
  • Intergovernmental authority on development (IGAD) office: This is the East African regional organization which was established in 1986 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Their mission is to assist and complement the efforts of the member states to achieve increase of co-operation in food security and maintenance of peace, security and humanitarian affairs. The regional government must acknowledge that the ending of South Sudan civil war is their primary task that they will never escape; their success will pave ways for the citizens to endorse them and their failure will create more critics.

    IGAD and AU must work together to convey an infinite peace to the region. They must find solution to the ongoing conflicts in South Sudan, Sudan, Somalia, Central Africa Republic, Congo, Eritrea, Nigeria, Liberia and many more. The two organizations (IGAD-AU) must confront the government of China concerning their military aiding to Kiir’s and many other African’s governments.

The Chinese government has an effective physical action that can help South Sudan obtains sustainable peace by withdrawing their employees and tools back to China. President Xi Jinping of China and his counterpart Vladimir Putin of Russia must refrain from military & economic support to South Sudan.

Dear patriot South Sudanese, rejoice with those who rejoice, mourn with those who mourn (Romans 12:5). Wherever you live you should always remember that you are originally a South Sudanese. The true patriots of South Sudan constantly remember to do something about the war that torn our country apart. South Sudan was put to turmoil by the self-proclaimed president Salva Kiir Mayardit. Mr. Salva Kiir was nominated to lead South Sudan to the referendum of 2010, and then subsequently mandated to lead the new nation after the independent in 2011; he was not elected. Today South Sudan is independent and its first election is yet to be scheduled.

Salva Kiir is not our country’s president simply because he contravened his due mandates, he was nominated to protests and leads the South Sudanese to the Promised Land, but unfortunately he turned and bit the hand that enlightened him. Ordinarily, you don’t elect somebody to kill you or refuse to give back the leadership when require. Salva Kiir have eaten the Apple of death from the Garden of Eden by killing Nuer in Juba and Upper Nile region, Shulluk in Malakal, Dinka in Rumbek and Equatorians.

South Sudan is not a property of Salva Kiir, we the people ought to decide for ourselves and we want peace above personal ego. Kiir and SPLM will be long gone but South Sudan will live to see another day. We have the right to choose for ourselves a new government.

We need peace in peace in South Sudan and that peace cannot be achieved unless Mr. Kiir steps aside because he had become a polarizing figure.

To my precious leaders of South Sudanese communities in the globe, kindly be informed that this message is directed to you; please consider organizing a turnout in remembrance of our deceases. You can also demonstrate to put more pressure to the International community – the must acknowledge that South Sudan case is urgent and needs to be their prime agenda.

For more information about the outfit of the demonstration, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Long live Democratic Republic of South Sudan!

Long live nationals and citizens of South Sudan!

Zechariah James Machar is a simple South Sudanese who can be approach via

You Better Silence than to put that ugly comment across: this Serve as a Guiding Note for International Commentators and Observers of South Sudan Conflict

By Chuol C. Puoch,


Chuol C. Puoch

Chuol C. Puoch

October 23rd, 2014(Nyamilepedia) — It’s not only disgusting putting a comment in a very sensitive conflict like that of South Sudan base on rumors and imagination, but also a situation worsening, if you didn’t know. I write this piece not as a criticism to the international observers and commentators of South Sudan conflict, but rather a guidance piece on the events that led to the outbreak of conflict in South Sudan as well as the factors contributing on its prolonging.

Honestly, it has been happening not only as a surprise, but instead a shocking, hearing some international friends of South Sudan commenting obliviously and sometime misinformed on the South Sudan conflict’s complexity. Most of them, but surely not all of them, have been seeing the South Sudan conflict as mere tribal mocking and cleansing which would have been addressed in whatever way possible by Salva Kirr, whether militarily or politically and get rid of the Nuer of Riek Machar.

The Nuer as a community had no ground of recognition from the east African Countries for a very long time. Some leaders of the SPLM who were Dinka ethnic group used to lei to the east African in conferences calling other tribes as part of Dinka; there was Dinka-Topossa, Dinka-Nuer, Dinka-Shilluk and just count the rest of the sixty tribes of South Sudan. However, the east African observers didn’t know this community calls Nuer. They didn’t know their social and culture guiding principle which absolutely base on Democracy and equality.

Tribal hatred and differences:

In a brief explanation, the conflict was thought of by the close friends of Salva Kirr in politics, masterminded, designed and supported by Yoweri Museveni of Uganda; it was later fueled by tribal hatred between Dinka and Nuer which led to the Nuer massacre in Juba in the first place.

Dinka and Nuer had never been under one ruling in their societies. From 1960th to 1970th during the Anyanya I struggle, Nuer and Dinka were together in uniforms as soldiers but not in the governance and societal solidarity and prosperity. It was believed that the second enemy of a Dinka or a Nuer after an Arab was Nuer and Dinka respectively. From the Akobo mutiny of 1975 up to 1982, which mark the Anyanya II struggle in the history of South Sudan, the forces of the South Sudanese Liberation Moment/Army (SSLM/A) and their politicians never strongly come together and looked into the tribal tension between the Nuer and the Dinka.

Thus, it was also the case with the SPLM/A after its formation in 1983 especially the events of 1990-91 where some leaders thought to have had the other tribes and ethnicities pocketed with no political existence and strength among others, which eventually led to the division of SPLM/A into two complete different unit: The SPLM/A-Torit faction and the SPLM/A-Nasir faction.

The leaders of all the South Sudanese moments (Anyanya I which started in Torit from 1955, before the Sudan independence to 1972 after Addis Ababa Peace Agreement; Anyanya II which erupted in Akobo in 1975 and lasted till the formation of the SPLM/A in 1983; The SPLM/A of 1983 which is also the current South Sudan Republic) never had a chance to look into the ethnic difference and hatred and especially among the Nilotic tribes of Anyuak, Dinka, Nuer, Shilluk, etc.)

However, this conflict, though orchestrated politically, the ethnic aspect of it has been very deadly and divisive which make it the most badly contributing factor on the prolonging of this conflict.

Political Differences and Power Struggle:

SPLM as a political party ruling the Country, is very well associated with ethnic ideologies; even politicians themselves are much more concerned and caring for their tribe mates much more than those whom they shares the same political ideology, objectives and strategies with. This has badly made the South Sudan politics to be dirtier than it is in any other Country on the universe.

The power struggle and political differences is not something new to those who have been following the events in South Sudan from day one. As a matter of example, the SPLM/A was divided in 1991 due to some political differences and power domination which was ethnically motivated. There was the SPLM/A fighting under the ideology of a secular united Sudan base on democracy and unity of all the Sudanese people under the leadership of the Late Dr. John Garang De Mabior. The other SPLM/A was fighting for an Independence South Sudan which would be achieved and governed through the free wills of its people with Democracy and Rule of Law under the leadership of Dr. Riek Machar Teny-Dhurgon

The SPLM/A remained as different factions up to 2002 reconciliation and unification of ideologies which eventually favored the ideology of Dr. Riek Machar for the independence of South Sudan.

Before the signing of the CPA, Gen Salva Kirr Mayardit was not pleased by the unity of the two SPLM as the case would result into him losing his post as the 1st Deputy of the SPLM/A. He had to point a gun on his boss, Dr. John Garang in 2004 refusing to render his post to Riek Machar as that supposed to have been the case.

Fortunately, through the helps of Dr. Riek Machar himself and the late George Athor Deng (May his soul rest in Peace), Salva Kirr was convinced by the two to not spoil the to-be achieved comprehensive peace agreement with the Sudanese government. Riek assured Salva that he will talk over the issue with John Garang and he ( Salva) would be the 1st Deputy of the moment.

The current war was not a result of an instigated coup against the government; or rather was it a planned ethnic fighting. The war was purely a political fearing by the chairman of the SPLM who is also the president of the Country. He knew, and everyone knew, that he would have lost in the party election and the chairmanship would have been taken by other members of the party and especially Dr. Riek who expressed his interest for it.

Then, Gen. Kirr Mayardit had to cook his mind with the help of his regional friends and the founded solution was to make a self coup to arrest others for it. The real intention was not to imprison all of them, it was to kill the most popular ones and leave the yes-men survive in prison. None of the SPLM leaders planed any coup against the government of Salva Kirr Mayardit.

Not only that, there was absolutely no reason for a coup against somebody who doesn’t defeat you politically as Salva Kirr himself is not an influential leader even in his village, County and State of Warrap, leave alone the whole of South Sudan.

Ideologies versus Ideologies:

Should we pursue the SPLM for a united Sudan or the SPLM for independence of South Sudan? Should we believe in Dinka born to rule ideology or can we say that others can rule?

Can we go for federalism or remain centralized government under the name of decentralization? Should we embrace that clean democracy or remain dictatorship?

Can we rule the Country militarily or should we adopt the best form of governing a diverse Country under democratic political leadership?

All these and many more are the most dividing factors that always lead us to bloodletting confrontation in the history of our Country. Sometime, the above mentioned ideologies are always backed tribally depending on who from which tribe mastering what ideology.

Some More Fact and Realities:

It’s worth mentioning that there has never been any trust among the leaders of SPLM when it come to guiding and shaping the future of the Country. The only place you would find them cooperating is when it comes to looking for position and money in the government.

There is also the fact that even the SPLA troops have their loyalty not to the hierarchical commanders but their tribal general in the army. So, how do we expect such a military to ever unite and protect our Country?

In all those regards, the international commentators and observers only look at the outer surface of the situation without deep analysis to find out the truth. Some blames Riek Machar for this war while in fact he (Riek) was the right target of the conflict. The rebellion was not started by Riek Machar, it was due to the Nuer massacre in Juba by Salva which led Gen. Peter Gatdet Yaka (or Jundi Irag as that is his nick name) to rebel against the government in absent of Riek Machar who was running in the bush for his dear life. Peter Gatdet fired his first bullet two days after the massacre and Riek Machar arrived some 7 days later after managing to escape from Juba.

Chuol C. Puoch is a South Sudanese living in South Sudan; (But in Nairobi in time of writing this piece) he can be added/follow on Facebook with his name mentioned above, on twitter @ChuolChot and via email: . You can also access and follow his words on

South Sudanese -American hip hop Artist Jay K’s Opinion on Dec 15 conflict!

By Makoy Kuong Thong


Jay K

October 23, 2014(Nyamilepedia) — South Sudanese -American raised hip hop artist Jay K shares his opinions about the Dec 15 conflict that occurred in juba and led the country into civil war. Jay K decried how this war devastated the efforts to develop the country that was destroyed during the Sudan North-South conflict. During an interview with him, Jay K gives an experience which he had gone through at his childhood in a conflicted area then Sudan in relations to the current civil war in South Sudan.

(Q) When were you born and where?

(A) I was born in 1989 in Leer and in 1997 at the age of 8 my mother took me and my siblings to Khartoum after Leer being burnt down by pro-Khartoum militias. The situation at that time was horrible because people could be killed and others were left without shelters and food but we managed to reach to Khartoum through difficult journey.

(Q) How was life in Khartoum after leaving your home town in Bentiu?

(A) It was not fair because South Sudanese at that time used to be sheltered under big building where the Arabs throw their trench yet the country belonged to all Sudanese.

(Q)You seem to have more Western cultures, which particular country in the West did you go to?

(A) I went to United State at the end of 2002 when I was 12 going to 13years and settled there for ten years as a permanent residence, America was good country because their government do provided us with basic services such as shelters, food, education, health care for free and also giving jobs latter compared to Sudan government that treated us as slaves.

(Q)America is a good country why did u come back to Africa?

(A) I came to Africa because it’s my mother land and I love it the reason we went to U.S in the first place was because the war that was taking place in Sudan my mom didn’t like the way we as South Sudanese were being treated by the Northerners so when she got the chance to get us out of the country and we took off. After our country had its independence I through it was a big blessing so I came back to promote my music locally.

(Q) How did you reach to U.S because at that time Sudan government bared going abroad and your mother I believed had no job to afford travel versa?

(A) It was hard to get out of the country but my uncle Peter Thiep was already in the united state so he uses to provide us with money for food and my mom used to get money out of distilled alcohol and she saved up enough for us to get the train to Egypt. When we got to Egypt my uncle sends us a visa just to try if it will work so we did that and just like that we were accepted.

(Q)Coming back to the current situation in South Sudan, how do you feel about the ongoing conflict in the country?

(A) About the conflict I would say that I am very disappointed. I mean we fought for over 21 years and we finally had our independence but not more than 2 years latter we are now turning to kill one another so what did we fight for all those years?. I still don’t believe it had really happened it was nothing that I expected at all. I was looking forward to a one united south Sudanese and putting our hands together, develop our country and promote unity not killing people based on tribes. What had happened in juba should not have been done by someone or government who in his right mind I think lack of education was the causes of the conflict maybe if we had leaders who are well educated and understand the importance of a human being, innocent citizens would not been killed because of their tribe.

(Q)What advice can you give to South Sudanese leaders?

(A) I can only tell them that killing innocent people just because of the tribe they come from is not the right solution to your political Issues. If u have personal issue with any politician or u fear that they might taken over your position or maybe they have better quality to lead then do not take it on the people of his/her tribe. The people you killed could be the one who wanted you in power so instead of killing them you should have protected them.

(Q)You are a musician for how long have u been doing music?

(A) I have been doing music for 8 years and I have been in love with it since I was 12 years and started my first recoding when I was 16 in United State of America.

(Q) What motivated you to do music?

(A) I grow up listening to music my mother used to sing traditional songs in Nuer language at weddings, I used to watch her singing and saw how people showed her love so I always wanted that power. But what motivate me the most is the fact that I can educate and change people life’s just through three minutes song. Having the power of getting a group of an individual coming together and listen to what I have to say is what motivates me to come up with good music.

(Q)What do you talk about in your music and what message have you been passing through your songs?

(A) In my music I sing about love and I also educated people about things I see around me, for example if a government do something wrong I express my feeling and pass the message through songs. I also advice the government through songs if there is something I feel they should do for the public I put it in a song hoping they will learn from it.

(Q)Do you have any song about the current conflict in South Sudan?

(A)Yes I have two songs about the conflict. I have one call (Disappointed) which is based on how disappointed I was about the tribal killing in juba. I was disappointed that my so call leaders have taken my young nation back to the war just because of their political interest. I personally love justice, equality, and freedom so I have a song call (freedom fighters.) I fight for freedom to dress myself the way I want, be friend with who I want, sing the music that I love, fall in love with any girl regardless of the tribe she comes from. I love freedom I am a freedom fighter.

(Q) Jay kay where can audiences get your music?

(A) They can get my music on ( just by typing jay kay) they can look me up on ( by typing jaykoung1) even ( generol jay

In a conclusion, Jay K who is a Hip hop artist will have a live show on Friday 31 Oct 2014 at Shark@ttck opposite to Supper stare restaurant at Bunga Soya area in Kampala Uganda.

The artist was interviewed by Makoy Kuong Thong and he can be reach

Opening Statement by Comrade Pagan Amum Okiech, SPLM Leaders (Former Political Detainees) 20th, October, 2014, Arusha, Tanzania

Your Excellency, Ndugu Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete, President of the United Republic of Tanzania and Chairman of Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM),

Your Excellency, Gen. Salva Kiir Mayardit, President of the Republic of South Sudan and Chairman of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM),

Your Excellency, Dr. Riek Machar Teny, First Deputy Chairman of the SPLM,

Mzee John Samuel Malecela, Former Prime Minister and Former Deputy Chairman of CCM and Chairman of this Intra-SPLM Dialogue,

Excellencies, the Secretary General of CCMand the Foreign Minister of Tanzania,

Honourable Delegates from the SPLM divided family,

The last four political detainees, Oyai Deng Ajak, Pagan Amum, Majak Agot and Ezekiel Lol Gatkouth booing the kangoro court before their release in April, 2014(Photo: file)

The last four political detainees, Oyai Deng Ajak, Pagan Amum, Majak Agot and Ezekiel Lol Gatkouth booing the kangoro court before their release in April, 2014(Photo: file)

Ladies and Gentlemen,

October 23, 2014(Nyamilepedia) — On behalf of the SPLM Leaders, who were detained following the crisis of December 15th, 2013 for calling for reforms and internal democracy within the party and on my own behalf, I take this opportunity to thank Ndugu Chairman of CCM for extending his solidarity by convening this Intra-SPLM dialogue in the beautiful city of Arusha.  We wholeheartedly appreciate this facilitation by CCM and the support of Crisis Management Initiative (CMI).  Offering the SPLM family this forum and a conducive environment for dialogue is like extending a ladder to somebody who has thrown himself/herself in a deep pit.  Unless we choose to get out of the pit by climbing up, the ladder alone will not get us out.  Therefore, we must climb the ladder provided to us by CCM in order to come out of the abyss we have landed ourselves into.

Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates,

The Secretary General of CCM, Ndugu Abdulrahman Kinana, wisely made it clear the other day that their support and solidarity is out of historical commitment to support and help the African Liberation Movements mend their differences and heal their rifts whenever that occurred, without unhealthy interference.  CCM is making it clear that it shall not diagnose our ailment and problem.  In other words, CCM will not give the SPLM a prescription or a recipe but rather it provides only a forum, a conducive environment and the moral encouragement for us, the SPLM leaders, to take advantage and the courage to accept the reality that we have the responsibility, in fact a collective responsibility, for the current crisis in the country.  This crisis, as we all know, emanated from failure of leadership, resulting in differences among the top SPLM leaders.

Therefore, we must admit this fact and discuss it during the dialogue when we resume in November with open minds and hearts so as to correct ourselves and agree to recommit to the core values and fundamental principles of our Movement.  Let us courageously recognize that we have lost direction and have deviated from the vision of the SPLM.  We have fundamentally gone wrong, divided ourselves and have thrown the country into chaos.  However, it is human to err and fall, the greatest of human spirit is in correcting oneself and rising up from the fall. By admitting such facts, our hearts will be ready to reconcile the differences and heal our self-inflicted wounds.  To do this successfully, we have to move away from finger pointing and blame game and go beyond our egos and fears.  Let us leave judgment to history but for now let us focus our energies in resolving the current crisis by reuniting the divided SPLM family so as to rescue the country from falling into total chaos and disorder.

Finally, inspired by the spirit of Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, the founding father of this peaceful and united nation and by the vision of our founding father and hero, Dr John Garang De Mabior, who dreamt of a new and just society at peace with itself and with its neighbors, a common wealth united in its diversity; inspired by this spirit, let us launch this process of the Intra-SPLM Dialogue in order to return the party to its glory and provide collective visionary leadership to the people of South Sudan in this second phase of state and nation building.  We, the SPLM Leaders (Former Political Detainees), are certain that the SPLM vision shall come to fruition.  As SPLM committed cadres, we will engage in this dialogue with open hearts and minds in order to reunite the SPLM and realize its vision of a free, peaceful and prosperous South Sudan.

Oh God bless South Sudan!

SPLM Oyee!

CCM Oyee!

Thank you.

Maj. Gen. Gathoth Gatkuoth: Salva Kiir Must Resign or Be Forced To Resign

“Salva Kiir must resign his positions both as Chairman of SPLM and as President of the Republic or else he will be forced to resign by gallant pro-democracy and freedom fighters” Maj. Gen. Gathoth Gatkuoth

Authored by David Deng Gach Pal,

Updated at 12:35pm, Oct 23rd, 2014(PST)

Gen. Gathoth Gatkuoth Hothnyang, addressing the wounded hereos in Akoboi on 2nd September 2014.(Photo: Nyamilepedia/Yuer Dang)

Gen. Gathoth Gatkuoth Hothnyang, addressing the wounded hereos in Akoboi on 2nd September 2014.(Photo: Nyamilepedia/Yuer Dang)

October 23, 2014(Nyamilepedia) — Following the signing of the “Framework for Intra-SPLM Dialogue” by SPLM-Juba, SPLM IO and SPLM former detainees in Arusha, Tanzania on 20th October 2014, the Military Governor and Zonal Commander of Upper Nile State Maj. Gen. Gathoth Gatkuoth Hoth nyang requests me to bring to public domain his critique of the aforesaid agreement. While some may receive it with optimism, others may perceive it contrary.

Reacting to the Principle number 9, and Objectives 1 & 2 of the Framework Agreement, Gen. Gathoth Gatkuoth said the Framework agreement will never bring peace for its overall objective is merely to reunite the party, reconcile party leadership, and by implication, consolidate Salva Kiir’s grip on power, which he is today losing much more spectacularly. Why giving him a chance to prolong his brutality and devastatingly undesirable rule over people? This casts an air of pessimism over the prospects of peace, stability and prosperity in South Sudan.

If the Intra-party dialogue aims to unite the party, then, that, at least in my view, is unrealistic. “SPLM can never be reunited, and so will not make a reunion,” said the Military Governor, because SPLM failed to resolve its internal crisis in December 2013, and instead Salva Kiir resorted to abusive use of power by trying to purge the party of its charismatic members as well as of democratic voices of reform. To make the matter worst, by using his personal Bhar El gazal militias, Salva Kiir massacred over 50,000 innocent civilians (majority children and women) of Nuer Ethnic group, widening the scope of the conflict into becoming a South Sudanese crisis rather than SPLM.

Objective 1 will not be achieved because reconciling the leadership of the SPLM party failed on December 15, 2013 when Salva Kiir used the SPLM Liberation Council conference to grind the old wounds. No matter how hard others, including the religious leaders, attempt to reconcile the leadership, Salva Kiir will always turn them a deaf ear for him to hold on power. Salva Kiir got into power by accident and he knows he is not qualify to win by democratic majority, why will he allow any reform in the party? It is only when Salva Kiir steps downs from party chairmanship as well as presidency of the Republic can sustainable peace, unity, and universal reconciliation be realized in South Sudan.

Objective 2 is just in the realm of fantasy. How will war be stopped, government and people of South Sudan be led to peace, stability and prosperity if Ebola Salva Kiir is still in power? Salva Kiir’s government has failed miserably to even establish stability let alone prosperity in South Sudan. We need a good public interest-oriented leader to takeover the leadership of the country if SPLM is to achieve such items outlined by objective 2.

Hence, in a nutshell, the Military Governor & Zonal commander, Gen. Gathoth Gatkuoth emphasizes that, for sustainable peace to be attained both by SPLM and South Sudanese people, Salva Kiir Mayardit must resign or be forced to resigned his positions both as the Chairman of SPLM and as President of the Republic. Firstly, he committed genocide on innocent people of South Sudan in December 2013 and thus he has lost legitimacy to rule South Sudan. Should he insists on holding such offices, then be assured that Salva kiir will be made to leave power by force.

Secondly, Salva kiir’s government is institutionally corrupt to the core. Not only did he allocate to his kinsmen and/or Dinka tribesmen all the key positions in the executive, judiciary and oil companies but also allotted watchmen and office sweepers’ positions to his relatives, with oil revenues being divided among Bhar el Ghazalians, close to his family alone, while the people of the rich Greater Upper Nile continue to suffer. Several times, Salva Kiir publicly declared his intolerance towards corruption, but failed to live up to it. He does not only condoned corruption but also ordered release of corrupt officials from prison. Salva Kiir himself is the symbol of corruption in the country. Millions of dollars have disappeared in his hands.

South Sudanese are disgruntled with Kiir’s hypocrisy and lack of integrity. He wants the laws of the land to protect his selfish interests while grossly violating the national constitution unashamedly. In order for South Sudanese to enjoy sustainable peace, stability and prosperity, Salva Kiir must relinquish power, or else he will be forced to resign by gallant pro-democracy and freedom fighters.

Thirdly, to marginalize other tribes, he made a policy of Dinkanisation of all foreign missions as well as Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Heads of missions and senior officials in Foreign Affairs Ministry are mostly Dinka. Such unfair and unjustly corrupt policies will continue to haunt South Sudan if Salva Kiir remains in power.

Thus, intra-SPLM dialogue will do little to save South Sudan that is already divided by Salva Kiir’s self-declared war. From grassroots’ perspective, the overall objective of war is not to seize SPLM powers; indeed SPLM is already divided into separate holdings and so can never be revived. But rather, the objective of war is to bring about total liberation of South Sudanese people from tyranny and dictatorship, endemically institutionalized corruption, tribalism, brutality and hypocrisy of Salva kiir’s leadership in such a way that, once peace is achieved, South Sudanese will never again experience civil war.

General Gathoth Gatkuoth, therefore, advises the international community and regional leaders to remain focus on the root causes of the civil war and listen, not to the lies, propaganda and deceptions of Salva Kiir and President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, but to what South Sudanese really want. To achieve lasting peace, Salva Kiir must step down to pave the way for South Sudanese to chose their transitional leader, pending presidential elections at the end of transitional period. The sooner he does that, the better for him and for the country.

David Deng Gach Pal – MPA, MAR

Secretary-General of Upper Nile State Military Government (in Opposition) &

Former Secretary-General (Cabinet Secretary & Head of Civil Service)

Upper Nile State –Malakal


Phone: +254 70413 0000

IGAD Countries Imposed their hidden Interest in South Sudan Crisis!

By John Kuek

The IGAD leaders meeting on a sideline in New York(Photo: supplied)

The IGAD leaders meeting on a sideline in New York(Photo: supplied)

Oct 23, 2014(Nyamilepedia) — IGAD stands for Intergovernmental Authority on Development. This organization was founded in 1986 by the following countries: Djibouti, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan, Uganda and Kenya, with a focus on development and environmental control. Its mission was revised and upgraded in 1996 to address issues of drought and development in the region. In addition, IGAD’s mission expanded to coordinate and harmonize policies in the areas of socio-economic, agricultural development, environmental protection and political and humanitarian affairs. The new development was viewed positive in the region. Eritrea became independent and joined the group in 1993; South Sudan joined the union and became the eighth member state of IGAD in 2011 after celebrating its independence. With no doubt, IGAD was viewed as an emerging leader by both the African Union and the United Nations.

As IGAD started to act on its programs with speed and enthusiasm, the African Union Peace and Security Council approved an IGAD proposal to deploy Peace Support Mission in Somalia in September of 2006. IGAD played a role of a policeman in the region, trying to keep peace and support developments. On February 21, 2007, the United Nations Security Council approved Resolution 1744, which authorized the deployment of a new African Union Mission to Somalia, relieving IGAD support mission troops. Clearly, one can see that it was a mission of IGAD countries to keep peace and bring development in the region. What was not part of IGAD’s mission was to help the leaders establish dictatorial empires in the region. There is no statement in the IGAD’s policies that supports criminals to stay in power, especially those who kill their own citizens. Now, a fundamental question emerged as the crisis in South Sudan revealed the true color of IGAD and its implicit goals. I would like to ask a paradoxical question, what is the role of the IGAD in East Africa? Is it to bring and maintain peace or create and support chaos? Well, the answer is simple. Let us look at brief stories of some individual leaders of IGAD in the region.

Who is Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, to begin with? This man has a long and negative story in the region. Museveni was involved in rebellions that toppled Ugandan leaders Idi Amin (1971–79) and Milton Obote (1980–85). After the disappearance of these “icons” in the region, the presidents of Burundi and Rwanda and Dr. John Garang of South Sudan, all in airplane crashes, and Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia of an unidentified poisoning, I have given Mr. Museveni a new title, “the cock among the hens” in the region. This man has a lot of blood in his hands. The death of the two presidents, for example, sparked one of the worst genocides in human race after the holocaust killed 80,000 Tutsi in Rwanda. Also, Museveni was suspected in the first Congo war (1996-1997) to have had a hand in it. He has long been suspected of John Garang’s death, which remains an unsolved mystery today. The three inexperienced leaders, Paul Kagame, Uhuru Kenyatta, Hailemariam Desalegn are Mr. Museveni’s subordinates and cronies as is his key bodyguard, Salva Kiir. All are simply taking orders from him. Ugandan troops are everywhere in the region, which Mr. Museveni is using in an act of demagoguery.

Look at what has been going on in Somalia; is conflict in Somalia different from what is currently taking place in South Sudan? In the Somalian conflict, the international actors are either naïve of the reality on the ground or are just keeping eyes on their mere interests. Both international and regional actors have been providing interest based support, either weapons or money to different warring groups within the same country. This has made Somalia a chaotic country with anarchy, which will take years if not decades to resolve. The international actors, such the Arab states and Western states, have been drawn into Somalia’s conflict for various reasons including the prevention of terrorists from establishing roots in the region, acquiring new battle grounds and resources. At the regional level, the conflicting interests of IGAD member states in Somalia made it very difficult for the adoption of a common position by Somalians. There is no doubt that those few IGAD member states’ leaders are building an empire of dictators in the 21st century in East Africa. May be the so called “stable countries” in the region are benefiting financially from these chaos and oppression.

In the South Sudanese conflict, which really prompts this commentary, Mr.Yoweri Museveni, along with his inexperienced followers and the rest of the IGAD leaders came out with a bold statement condemning Dr. Riek Machar, as if he was the perpetrator of the Juba Nuer massacre. Mr. Museveni and his followers bowed to capture Riek in a few days if he refused to give up fighting. Their statement is a clue to their hidden interest in the South Sudan. Museveni is the cause and driving force in the conflict of South Sudan. One thing the South Sudanese government does not know is the fact that Museveni does not like or respect Salva Kiir as a leader in South Sudan. He portrayed Salva Kiir as a fool in that Mr. Museveni would not play his dirty tricks with because Salva could expose both of them to the world. Why has Mr. Museveni despised Riek Machar? He views Riek as an emerging leader in the region just like he did with John Garang, who would had the potential to unite the entire continent of Africa and at the same time eastern Africa.

Mr. Museveni is clearly a confused and unwise leader. He prefers to manipulate and control others for his own self-interests. Given his underlying motives, Mr. Museveni now has two missions in the South Sudanese war- to get rid of Riek Machar by any means possible and to also get rid of Salva, thus opening the door to force his own agenda. A good example is a new military corporation recently signed between Uganda and South Sudan, which paves the way for South Sudan government to smuggle guns and ammunitions in blackmailing the arm embargo policy imposed on South Sudan recently. This military corporation is unnecessary at this crucial time of peace negotiation for the people of South Sudan. One of the reasons that the peace talk became stalled in Addis Ababa is Ugandan military present in South Sudan. Have IGAD member states agreed to fight alongside the government of South Sudan? Also, the international observers have not reacted against this military agreement; are they for it? What is the reason for this peace to move forward, while it has been violated in a broad daylight by both the IGAD member state and the perpetrator of this war, Salva Kiir?

Why IGAD not serious about this peace process? Here is one of the reasons. The peace process in Addis Ababa has been slowed down due to numerous regional and international interests around it. Though IGAD is the leading broker of this peace, the international players are holding the key of the whole process. Troika members including the United States are the key players in this peace process by steering the process from behind the stage. With this, anyone would agree that IGAD as an institution faces many external challenges. In addition, the organization lacks leaders whose interest is to bring true and just peace, and stability in the region. I admired Ethiopia for maintaining neutrality in this South Sudanese war, though it lacks the financial capacity to push successfully and forcefully its peace initiatives forward.

IGAD Achievements in the Region

Credit must always be submitted where it dues. Despite these challenges noticed above, IGAD as an organization has done a magnificent job in bringing the Somali crisis to the attention of the international community, though it seems to have taken things easily enough, notwithstanding the sorrow and suffering that surrounded them on every side in the region. IGAD facilitated peace between Ethiopia and Somalia as well.

Within the IGAD policies, great emphasis was given to the peaceful settlement of regional conflicts as a means for achieving sustainable development. IGAD member states agreed to invest time and money to the following agenda items: to take effective collective measures to eliminate threats to regional cooperation, peace, and stability; to establish effective mechanisms of consultation and cooperation for the peaceful settlement of differences and disputes; and, to agree to deal with disputes between member states within this sub-regional mechanism before they are referred to other regional or international organizations (IGAD 1996). With this aim, three priority areas were identified: a.) conflict prevention, management and humanitarian affairs; b.) infrastructure development and food security; and c.) environmental safety control. IGAD has capitalized on the peace process between the Sudanese warring parties (the north-south conflict) and achieved it with a mighty help from the United States under President George W. Bush.

IGAD had earned an outstanding grade on that particular mission. With no doubt, the Somali and Sudanese peace processes was one of the major reasons that rendered the transformation of IGAD, hoping to do more in the region. To keep the region safe, IGAD members agreed to not support any “coup” plotter at all. This initiative was used by Yoweri Museveni and Salva Kiir to started war on December 15, 2014 in South Sudan, to kill Dr. Riek Machar and his political colleagues and pronounce the killing a coup and scapegoat it on the dead. God knew that what Museveni and Salva planned was harmful to the whole nation; thanks God Dr. Riek and all the political detainees survived. Now that Dr. Riek and his political allies survived and spoken the truth, IGAD leaders have no legitimate reason to gang up against the SPLM/A in Opposition. Clearly, IGAD has no use for the region as a few members are promoting their own selfish interests. Everything has a starting and an ending point. IGAD’s mandate to provide services to the region will come to an end soon. Learning the truth about IGAD’s interest, I am afraid that some prominent member states will withdraw their membership in just a matter of time when they discovered the hidden interests of a few leaders among them.

The Ending of IGAD Legitimacy in the Region

Here is what IGAD leaders have overlooked in this current crisis. South Sudan has been strained recently to the continuation of regional instability. This could probably be the worst turning point in the region if IGAD member states do not pay attention to the damage they have created and are also supporting. The region needs to look back to what had happened to both Ethiopia and Somalia during the Cold War. Indeed, the Cold War led to the end of dictatorial regimes in Ethiopia and Somalia and “the ideological differences and military confrontations associated with it” (Kinfe 2006). The newly “emerging leaders” in the post-Cold War era wanted to promote policies of peaceful relations and a new era of cooperation and co-existence. This was one of the ways to unite the East African countries, such as Horn of Africa and Great Lakes region as a one giant continental business hub for entire Africa. This promise is now slipping away as the member states started pursuing their individual and perhaps selfish-interests. Instead of uniting the region with collaboration between all the member states in the region, handling issues with care and dignity, Mr. Museveni, Kenya’s Uhuru Kenyatta and Rwanda’s Paul Kagame have lately appeared to expand their territories and operate in trilateral “coalition” in a rather zealous and oblique integration with Tanzania and Burundi while bypassing Tanzania and other states.

Tanzania has warned that any efforts to sideline it while fast-tracking the East African Federation could cause failure for the whole regional integration project. Dr. Ladislaus Komba, Tanzania’s High Commissioner to Uganda, reiterates on the interest based policies of some of the IGAD member states leaders and predicted “doom” for the East Africa Community if alienation and disconnectedness in some states continued. How about between Uganda and Sudan, LRA and the SPLM/A North? South Sudan invited the SPLM/A North and Darfur groups to the war, fighting alongside the government. The Ugandan military has armed these rebels, hoping they get rid of Riek Machar’s forces and continue through Sudanese territory to help change the regime in Khartoum. When and if Sudan understands exactly what Uganda and South Sudan are doing, it will do the same with South Sudanese rebels. The two countries will start fighting a proxy war, which could lead to a serious confrontation between the two countries. When this happens, what will the rest of IGAD countries do, Ethiopia and Kenya, for example? Will they remain neutral or join the play in the field, on which side? How about other interests around the world, such as the Islamic fundamentalists in West and North Africa? What message is this to the region? I am going to leave it to those regional analysts to ponder.

Pitfalls on the Current Peace Proposal

Upon studying the IGAD’s current peace proposal for South Sudan, the layout has not deviated that much from a road map to lasting peace in South Sudan that we have all yearned for.   However, this IGAD proposal fell short of addressing what brought this “senseless war” to this young country in the first place. This document infers the truth behind IGAD’s plan, which is to not eliminate the conflict, but rather to help manage it in a productive way. Though IGAD countries have been tirelessly working on this emerging regional wars, there have been three major competing interests that have hindered the peace process and which remain unaddressed: a.) power-based, b.) rights-based and c.) interests-based. The three key players in this peace process, IGAD, the government of South Sudan and the SPLM/A in Opposition, have lined up behind these three issues. IGAD should have been the one to identify these differences and come up with a mechanism to bridge gaps and arrive to a resolution that the country needs.

Power is often expressed through the use of authority, oppression, neglect, threats, and separation of people and groups. IGAD member countries have one thing in common which is to remain in power as long as possible. Any resolutions proposed toward removal of a president in power are viewed by this organization as going up against the interests of, or contrary to, IGAD and not in aiding the situation in South Sudan. IGAD member countries were originally expected to use their formal and informal authority to broker a resolution to this country’s problems, but it is heartbreaking to see that they have neglected this fundamental premise stipulated in their guidelines.

In the case of the Juba Nuer massacre, which occurred on December 15-18, 2013 in South Sudan, the SPLM/A in Opposition did not need to conduct any form of research to convene a meeting with IGAD members to prove to them that indeed the massacre took place. This massacre has been documented by various humanitarian groups and the United Nation that it is clearly considered an obvious form of genocide. Why did IGAD mediators not act based on the facts? Now, IGAD is rewarding the very government that just committed this despicable crime with more power to kill more innocent people again and again. The rights-based approach is the card played by the SPLM/A in Opposition to tell the world that the president lost his legitimate position on December 15, and therefore, he could no longer serve as the president. The key players or brokers in this process did not want to hear this fact because they knew that it is real.

A real and genuine interests-based approach is oriented toward problem-solving based on the needs of those involved, and not based on subjective feelings and politics. The party at fault and even the perpetrator often tries to move forward with the explicit goal of forgetting what happened and move on to a new chapter. The South Sudanese government is playing this card, saying a legitimate government cannot be asked to step aside before its term ends. The IGAD member countries seem to be favoring this claim rather than addressing the root causes of the conflict. That is, they are siding with the current government. This begs a crucial question: Why have the IGAD countries not moved in the direction of pushing for the current leadership to abandon South Sudan since the hallmark of the current government is pure corruption, hatred, and totalitarianism? The answer to this question is rather simple, the IGAD mediators are equally part of the corruption and have no interest in seeing to it that South Sudan become a peaceful and democratic country. In Kenya’s conflict between the Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga, Uganda created this very system IGAD is now attempting to impose on the South Sudanese rebels.

Can all three approaches be combined for the benefits of solving this very conflict? The answer of course is YES. All these methods-authority-based, right-based, and interest-based- can be useful and are deemed necessary in this current political situation. As a mediator, you have to acknowledge that such a thing had occurred, but you have to take a tough stand to resolve it. Meeting with warring parties, other parties and civil society to discuss the needs of everyone involved also can be instrumental in moving toward an interest-based solution, which the SPLM/A in Opposition longs for. The IGAD mediators can assist the warring parties to move from their complaints to understanding their own interests. Their complaints are often based on their position or perceived unfairness. They are often all-or-nothing statements and in the end only one person’s solution to the problem. Interests, on the other hand, are the motivations that are often unspoken and based on personal values and experiences. They are the reasons behind the complaint that IGAD favored one side or the other.

The IGAD proposal to ending the war in South Sudan notes 28 items to be implemented by the warring parties and other stakeholders. Below are the five items which I consider to be the most problematic.

First, there shall be no third vice president in this federal transitional government if this is what the IGAD want to introduce to the South Sudanese people.

Second, like Rwanda and Ethiopia in the region, the prime minister in South Sudan should be the one entrusted to implement national policies and leading the government to negotiate what is best for the country as defined by the stakeholders, the citizens of the country. The prime minister shall also be entrusted with the function of formulating the government programs of action in consultation with council of ministers. Third, the prime minister of the TGONU shall be eligible to stand for any public office in the national elections at the end of the transitional period. What in the world the IGAD is doing, proposing a useless prime minister position for the Opposition? I am wondering if this makes sense to IGAD members themselves. This document is an invitation of more conflicts, nothing less. Anybody would disown this cheap and shallow proposal to end this intensive war. It does not address a solution to this war in any way.

Fourth, it would make sense if the IGAD proposes that the executive of the transitional government shall comprise the president, the prime minister and council of ministers. I am not in favor of this model at all any way. Why not using the same system that is already in use? We need a president and a vice president system. Regardless of any of these methods, now, the debate would lie in WHO is going to lead this transitional government of national unity and complete all the steps discussed and approved in the peace talk? Will Salva lead this transitional government until election and be able to follow all the steps to ensure war does not happen again? If this is what IGAD believes and wants, it is not going to solve the problem. It’s indeed better to keep searching for a better scenario until a solution is sorted than reaching a cheap deal now only to return to war in a few months after. Salva would not want to change the status quo at all in South Sudan. He has forgotten the very reason he fought the Khartoum government for and the people who fought with him that he fought to change the status quo. He gestures this already in his circumstantial speeches that he does not want federal system and no Riek Machar again in his government.

Finally, I agree to the fact that a permanent constitution be reconstructed and used by the transitional government, and shall be based on federalism, being mindful of diversity with more power to states. This process will only be achieved under a different leader than Salva Kiir. Once this proposed structure is put in place and lead by a true nationalist, whose interest is to promote peaceful co-existent of all different ethnicities and believes, the country will be peaceful forever.

In closing this author believes that to bring a lasting peace to South Sudan this peace process needs to be forward to the African Union as the second step. IGAD leaders have been playing around with it and got stuck already. They are dancing between the truth and favoritism to their colleague more than solving the war. The South Sudanese people worldwide want to see this war comes to an end soon. They also need to have a model in place that will guarantee their co-existing forever. Salva Kiir made Nuer and Dinka believe that they are enemies to each other’s. This is not true. It was not an intention of the Dinka of South Sudan to kill the Nuer. It was Salva Kiir who wants to remain in power, and was intimidated by the present of Nuer figures who could claim the same right as anybody in South Sudan to run for the president, should an opportunity presents itself.

The author has a PhD in psychology. He is a South Sudanese living in the United States. He can be reached at