PART 2,
By Mak Banguot Gok (Makjohnson),
(Photo credit: ALBERT GONZALEZ FARRAN/AFP/Getty Images)
Aug 9, 2021 — As the continuations of my last week amplification on the above title, here therefore, I would like to continuous narrating some of the highlights on the same question as to “who is really responsible for the immediate causes of the SPLM/A-IO movement’s untimely verging to the edge of relapse”? This question is still somewhat strong in so many minds, especially the SPLM-IO movement ‘diehards enthusiasts who have been calling for bloodless remedies of resolving the standoffs before it escalated. Many well informed old fogeys of the SPLA/M-IO movement have been wondering as to “who really was letting the movement down at this very crucial time?”
Moreover, the answers to the above mentioned fact finding question differs, and it will continue producing different outlooks given the levels of SPLM-IO movement’s enthusiasts ‘destructive grounds (have already taken their disparaging sides amongst the two conflicting personalities, Machar and Gatdual). On the above question, some will continue ending up blaming the wrong figures in favor of the ones who are supposed to be censured.
What made almost every compromise impossible amongst the SPLM/A-IO leaders was because, not all of the SPLM-IO movement’s top leaders had a solid ground whence initially joined the revolution. Equally, not every man or a group of men, as well as those who can be heard today, claims more loyalty to the movement’s Chairman that has reason and capacity to alter the movement’s revolutionary paths. Amongst the leaders, some of them are more important in the SPLM-IO movement because of what they have done and the ability of agitating for an internal political redress. Some others are opportunists yearning for short-lived benefits.
Since 2015, the initial wave of those inconsistent ‘individuals who couldn’t withhold the hit have abandoned Machar’s political camp and rejoined Salva Kiir’s government. A group that comprised about 27 senior members of the SPLM/A-IO movement (13 military generals and 14 high profiles political figures) defected from SPLM/A-IO movement and retorted to the same putrefaction regime in Juba. They were cited as lacking revolutionary political purposes and leadership efficiency of the movement’s leader-Machar. Meanwhile, in 2016 after the J1 ‘incident in Juba, a very significant number of mostly political figures from within the SPLM-IO’s top leaders (then Advance Teams) have remained at the mercy of the same enemy in Juba. After the signing of the Peace Agreement in 2018, a similar mass defection inflicted SPLM/A-IO movement in such circumstances.
Therefore, the objective of my writing is all about telling you that we shouldn’t hold responsible anyone who has decided to abandon Machar’s political camp for one or another reasonable doubt. That means, before you individually identify and hold liable the one you thought of to be the cause agent that letdowns SPLM-IO movement, first gets the accurate version of the story and, therefore, acts based on the true picture. To conclude on who is right and wrong on the SPLM-IO movement’s obstacle event, an objective study of the situational context is overriding. Thus, a thorough cram of the verity that led to the vastness of SPLM-IO ‘supporters choose nothing else out of the prevailing difficulties within the movement, but imperfections (switching of an allegiance) from the movement’s leadership under Machar, one will exactly know who is spoiling the movement from within.
Moreover, a politically conscious minded person can have all the best reasons and explanation on which, the culpability of destroying the SPLM-IO movement only goes to the SPLM-IO Chairman (Dr. Machar) himself due to the following reasons. The SPLM/A-IO ‘revolutionary movement is reminiscent of any other mounting resistance struggles against the sitting political system. Likewise, the SPLM/A-IO-Led liberation struggle enclosing untold predicament (sufferings) to the ones who have preferred a revolutionary bipartisan. No money, no food, no almost all of the other necessities for earning whence one is in the bushes. And, for those of them who don’t put up with the strike of reality, they easily give up once subjugated by the thoughts of bearing in mind that, there are some other comrades profiting out of the same cause on which they/you equally contributed equivalent sweat for. (E.g. Now that, after the R-ARCSS signed three years ago, followed by partial establishment of the R-TGoNU,) some very few SPLM-IO ‘members are getting pleasure from alleged peace agreement in Juba. (E.g. those who came with the SPLM-IO Chairman and appointed to the R-TGoNU in Juba are somehow benefitting the dividends in pretext of the peace agreement) whilst the bulk of the movement’s partisans are suffering in the bushes. And, unfortunately others comrades in all the respective SPLM/A-IO controlled territories languished for three years seeing the peace agreement not being ideally implemented. The movement’s followers continue paying prices of meaningful knowledge of “what is actually going on with an ideal implementation of the peace agreement for three years since it has been signed?” Lack of objective organizational communication between the movement’s leader and subordinates served as the receipt for existing situational mistrusts.
Revolutionary movement of every kind, in every environment, and at any time is evenly excruciating. However, revolution can also give hope for future certainties in a corrupt situation like ours in South Sudan today. It works well with the situation where a group of individuals spearheading the struggle are bound by a shared common purpose. Consequently, lack of a political extrapolate to maximizes an endeavour for a common purposefulness, is that shattered the movement halfway. Those caught up in a political mediocrity easily fall short and relinquish
Nevertheless, SPLM/A-IO was formed by a mix of peoples whose prime’s objectives of waging war against the tribalism prearranged political demagoguery in Juba stridently hold an opposing political view. Amongst them were groups of people with dissimilar instantaneous expectations who have coupled with the movement since 2014 for the reason that, varieties of personal interests obliged them. Meanwhile, the majority who were unknowingly dragged into the struggle simply to facilitate them in an earnings process (searching for immediate political business ‘goals) have already quit Machar’s political camp. This group which has joined struggles whilst under opportunistic influence have before now defected and rejoined the same enemy in Juba. This is because political expectations were nowhere to be accommodated due to the SPLM-IO Chairman’s unwillingness to expand the movement’s political leadership structures.
Others groups were likewise unwillingly forced to join the struggle to avert being ethnicity targeted (specially, whence at the inception of the war in December, 2013, the Dinka-led government’s tribal militias have been hysterically committing uncountable human atrocities in Juba). This indiscriminate killing forcing populace out of their homes wittingly to occupied their residents thereafter. That mean, the masses displacement of an innocent civilians such as, orphans, vulnerable women and children who, in a multiple locations, are exposing to an hostile environment such as, the PoCs and refugees camp where, infancies children and elderly are succumb to acute human sufferings; gross human rights violations including raps, deliberately vandalized the people ‘livelihood plus their livestock and others sources/means of substance survivability obliged people to chose no other option, but joined the revolution. And, after a short stay with the SPLM-IO movement and, thereafter a person realizes that, the targeted killing and others of its kinds are lowering inside Juba, and then they found no reasons for continuous sufferings in bushes and PoCs that deserted back to Juba.
The last group has joined SPLM/A-IO with an objective of liberating people of South Sudan from the Dinka-led genocidal government which encompasses a variety of situations from corruption and deceit. Most of the SPLM-IO followers have joined the movement to stain the country’s most corrupt political status. ( E.g. are the bad governance which is centralised around the idea of not only corruption within the system in Juba, but also, and above all, lack of transparency and accountability, arbitrary policy making and the cheating of the South Sudanese who are governed by the rogue regime. The last groups have waited for long to see whether there is going to be changes of the leadership style by the movement’s chairman.
Hence! The SPLM-IO movement has failed to frame a clear political contact with its followers. Malfunctioning in addressing the separate, often largely subjective challenges within the movement’s organizational structures due to the nonexistence of mechanism, is one that can explain the enormous fatalism marked by the current debate on the SPLM/A-IO ‘political upheavals. Others groups that have joined SPLM-IO movement at its inception in 2014, were built-in (included) the ones who have been indebted to do so by a short-term sentiment of humanity. Meanwhile, the second group has early fixed with the SPLM/A-IO whence confirmed the rogue regime in Juba was openly implementing its genocidal demagogues that goes aboard on widely predestined indiscriminate butchery of an innocent civilians (specific ethnic community with an ethnically built political agenda.) Those who were only feared of their lives being targeted have also defected.
More importantly, the SPLM-IO Chairman’s administrative setting doesn’t give room for those who want to volunteer on strengthening the movement’s political agitation. Despite the SPLM-IO movement has provided an outlined strategy for working with civil society organizations to promote economic, social and political reform in South Sudan, many of the initiatives aiming at promoting certain kinds of governmental policies (economic policy reform and some others rights for the poor), while others aiming at promoting changes in society and culture (educating children and programs to recruit citizens in promoting democracy and peace in line with the movement’s political agenda) and, all these were to be carried out by SPLM-IO ‘structural social groupings if, indeed, Dr. Machar wasn’t detrimental to the success of his own movement.
At a time when technology, media, and economic progress are empowering people, including non-state actors such as the SPLM-IO movement, politically empowering and amplifying the power of public opinions are more than anything easy through media and other means of communication. If the Chairman (Machar) were able to used information technologies as a mean for all types of his communication with the SPLM-IO military units and political structures, then the only problem of Machar squeezed in Juba or elsewhere, and, not able to communicates or meets with his followers would have solved. E.g. If the SPLM-IO Chairman was really serious on reaching out to whoever may remain skeptics amongst his followers, and might be expecting an accurate version of what is really happening currently with the R-ARCSS ‘implementation in Juba, there would be so many means to communicate frequently.
The SPLM-IO Chairman’s failure to engage the movement’s political actors and societies leaves many supporters with unhappy and highly limited alternatives. People to people centered policy efforts to promote democracy are supposed to continue until the SPLM-IO followers come to understand that democracy is more than just the formal state institutions of voting, transparent governance, and an independent judiciary. Not since the SPLM-IO movement took over the governing machinery so that a democratic ‘political project will be implemented. Democracy also depends on informal, subjective qualities of social trust, consensus and cohesion. Everything which the SPLM-IO chairman had to do was a true civilian governing system, including social and cultural attitudes that facilitate informal accommodation and solution of conflicts amongst the movement’s followers and South Sudanese in general.
Without an informal institutions arrangement that could promote consensus, trust, and conflict reduction within the movement’s military and political structures, we can say that it will place an intolerable burden on formal democratic ambition on its own. We believe these experiences were considered by the SPLM-IO leadership, it could offer powerful lessons for reducing conflicts even in the most difficult places and for promoting the trust that is crucial to successful democracies. They connect citizens beyond ethnic, religious, or tribal identity to larger, expanded identities. Institutionalizing connection and engagement of citizens across loyalties by the SPLM/A-IO can provide a powerful antidote to tribalism, encouraging an expanded national consciousness, which is an essential part of nation-building.
However, accomplishing these effects requires that they be undertaken with seriousness and on a scale. Perhaps the most important question to ask skeptics is this: What else has worked to reduce conflict and promote trust in these tribal societies that have become the principal concerns of the SPLM-IO dealing with national security policy?.
These and others similar imperfections with the SPLM-IO’s Machar leadership style have made many people confused as to, “who is really amongst those who have and are still defecting from the SPLM-IO having a reason and ability to abandon Machar’s and survive.”
This is because, too many people have defected from Machar’s political camp first cited lack of respect and commitment to the revolutionary methods (continuations of an agitations militarily); nepotism and nonexistence of an objective communication through the SPLM/A-IO’s military and political ranks and files. This according to many defectors, it is attributed to Machar’s always invisibility at the faces and ears of his supporters caused instability within the movement and, many people, if not all, believed that, frustration due to the lack of a sounding and an objective communication led to the rampant political disarray.
Social trust, forged by encouraging people to communicate across loyalties — including political loyalties — is an important factor in spurring any government to broaden participation in a political system. When governments crack down on csos and their advocacy of rights, it is often because they fear uncontrolled, convulsive change driven by groups they do not trust.
TO BE CONTINUED…………………
The author, Mak Banguot can be reached through email at johnsonmak61@gmail.com
The statements, comments, or opinions published by Nyamilepedia are solely those of their respective authors, which do not necessarily represent the views held by the moderators of Nyamilepedia. The veracity of any claims made are the responsibility of the writer(s), and not the staff and the management of Nyamilepedia.
Nyamilepdeia reserves the right to moderate, publish or delete a post without warning or consultation with the author(s). To publish your article, contact our editorial team at nyamilepedia@gmail.com or info@nyamile.com.
