“Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.” ― George Carlin
By Peter Gai Manyuon
July 31, 2014(Nyamilepedia) — In South Sudan, once we talk of peace and harmony, some, disgustedly the enemies of peace and reconciliation would begin to analyze our simple thoughts in complex and different ways. Well, before diving you into my simple perspectives, I would like to put us on the same page by defining peace and reconciliations given that they will dominate this article.
I believe that anyone can define peace and reconciliation base on his or her understanding of these concepts. To me, peace is when people are able to resolve their conflicts without violence, and can work together to improve the quality of lives. Peace is when everyone lives in safety without fear or threat of violence. Peace is when everyone is equal before the rule of law, and when the systems for justice are trusted, fair and effectively protect people’s rights. Peace is when everyone is able to participate in shaping political decisions and the government is accountable to the people. Peace is when everyone has fair and equal access to the basic needs for their wellbeing – such as food, clean water, shelter, education, healthcare and a decent living environment. Peace is when everyone has an equal opportunity to work and make a living, regardless of gender, ethnicity or any other aspect of identity.
On the other hand political reconciliation involves the repairing of damaged relationships among members of a society, a community or a country.
Reconciliation at the societal level intuitively seems necessary to prevent continual wrongdoing and/or reprisals for past wrongdoing. Yet, at the same time, the prospects for actually achieving political reconciliation seem extremely unlikely, precisely in the contexts where it is most needed. In addition, a certain moral unease often accompanies calls for political reconciliation.
A lingering worry as to whether it is permissible to try to foster political reconciliation hovers in the background, considering the extent and character of the horrific violence and wrongdoing that created the need for political reconciliation in the first place.
Moreover, ascertaining the possibility and moral justifiability of the pursuit of political reconciliation depends on first understanding what such reconciliation entails. Reconciliation is often considered synonymous with forgiveness. This implies that the possibility of reconciliation is conditional on the possibility of forgiveness in the aftermath of wrongdoing. Reconciliation’s moral justifiability hinges on the moral permissibility of forgiveness. Hence, who will bring peace to the people of South Sudan?
Many South Sudanese are conscious of who will bring peace back to the people of South Sudan. Others are saying Federalism is the only way to bring peace, other are of the view roundtable discussions is the only option and some are assuming fighting using AK47 is the only mean to end the current crisis.
Absolutely, in the current context where many people have been lost and others are displaced from their Cities and homes, you will find that, it will be very heard to calls people for reconciliation processes but if people are committed and have love for the Country then things can move well without any agitations.
Justification for peace
The author believes that peace can only be achieved through coming together as South Sudanese people and realize our cultural diversity as one nation with one objective, regardless of regionalization that is being practice right now by the enemies of peace. Of course, the enemies of peace are the people who ordered the massacres and mass killings of one Community in Juba. The hatred comes between Nuer (Naath) and Dinka (Jieng) due to misconceptions from Kiir’s loyalists, who assumed that the killing of one tribe will silence the Community of (Naath) to fear, which later came as a U turn and lead to the retaliations and resistance that has taken all of greater Upper Nile and some parts of Bhar-elgazal.
What have the people who killed people in Juba achieved so far? Nothing have been achieve up to date, only they have worsen it to the extent that, have led to destabilization of the whole Country and more so they are waiting for International Criminal Court (ICC) to indict the culprits who killed civilians in Juba and Bor respectively .
Who are supposed to participate in the peace process?
Each and every stakeholder should take part in restoring peace to the people of South Sudan, it is you and I to come up with strategy or good mechanism to convene the dictator to step down and allow the democratization processes to prevail in the Republic of South Sudan. If we keep silence without talking who will advocate for peace and reconciliation in South Sudan?
Overview :
The current Peace and Reconciliation or National Healing Commission headed by Archbishop Daniel Deng Bul is doing nothing as per the peace process is concern in South Sudan. No one will say the commission is doing the needful rather than subrogating the ongoing process in Addisa-baba. The commission is too political, even the people who are running it are too lazy in one-way or the other.
Well people might have a perception that, it was the President who appointed the Management of the commission therefore; they should not do much since the current leadership is the most tyranny government that only focuses on corruption cases, tribalism and sectarianism accompanying by illiteracy but once you are appointed even though by interest, if you really have a sense of humanity, you should do the work that can benefits the entire citizens regardless of political interest behind the scene.
I don’t know what is wrong with the people from the Churches in South Sudan? Pastors have left the work of God for politics. What a disgrace? You go to the Church bible is politicize and even pastors are digressing from the message that, they should pass on to the congregation but they turn it to something else. Oh my God, open your eyes!!!
Hence, having contextualized and analyze the all scenario, I have concluded that, what people should focus on is to have a sense of togetherness and loving each other as fellow South Sudanese , regardless of tribes and clans.
Many people are of the view that, peace and reconciliation will not work and others are saying peace and harmony will be the only way that will bring the people of the Republic of South Sudan in to one community with one objective and principle.
The ideology of parochialism, tribalism and nepotism is what should be look at in this current crisis where people are leaving in refugee and others in exiles.
In Conclusion, inciting words should be monitored and should be observed in order for a peaceful co-existence to prevail in South Sudan and beyond. Giving messages or talking like Philip Aguer who said recently they have killed Rebels in Nasir and Ayod in big numbers will take us to square one again. A person like Aguer, Ateny, Malak Ayuen and Makuei Lueth should talk’s words that resonate this time because people are in the middle of approaching peace deal.
All the spokespersons must respect communications ethics and principles that governance the profession. Some of them just enter in to the profession when they have not been taught how to communicate well to the masses across the globe. In communication, there are channels that need to be followed when one is passing information either to one person, groups of people, huge audiences and the world at large. Talking without full stop, apostrophe has destroyed the public relations profession in the Republic of South Sudan.
Loving one another is what will take South Sudan ahead.
Author is one of editors of Nyamilepedia, Independent Journalist and Columnist who has written extensively on the issues of Democratization and Human Rights in South Sudan. You can follow him on www.independentjournalistpgm.wordpress.com
