In the article titled “Things Fall Apart”, in the Diplomat
of February 2014 (Volume 043), Mohammed Warsame, confirms his appalling
ignorance of the political history of South Sudan, including her liberation struggles
and the twists and turns of events that led to her independence in 2011 when he
unapologetically “reports” to the magazine, a despicable combination of
intellectually manufactured half-truths and blatant lies.
The second paragraph of his article reads in part; “Kiir was
politically wounded, perhaps fatally, as his country heads for general
elections next year. Indeed, his decision to force his way into a second term
was at the heart of his dramatic fallout with his erstwhile deputy.” This
statement as well as a later one – ““Just three years into his term, south
Sudan imploded into a bitter and divisive ethnic rebellion pitting his majority
Dinka tribe against the Nuer community of his former deputy, the charismatic
Machar”, betrays the standards of cogency expected of a thoroughly researched
paper. I find it fallacious and grossly dishonest for someone to make a
judgment based on bases projections. Certainly, the general elections shall be
in May 2015, does it therefore make any analytical sense to preempt without
supportive facts, a possibility of a forceful retention of power by the
incumbency? If this is not an inflammatory statement, then should we redefine
incitement?
With all due respect to my brother Mohammed, I beg to point
out that the premise of personal opinions and lopsided analysis on the strength
of which he has repeatedly mocked and vilified President Kiir and his
administration are completely limited, misplaced and unreliable and should
therefore be treated with a well-deserved contempt.
Shall I explain?
While the English language in the vastness of its
philological richness avails great expressive adjectives that can add value to
discourse, my good brother has stuck in a diminutive cesspool of bigoted
insults to derogatively define the President of the Republic of South Sudan.
His statement “Garang held the SPLA together by his sheer personality and
charisma; Kiir suffers a sharp deficit of both” as well as “…Kiir was never a
leader in the mold of Garang or even Machar, he will therefore, avers Colonel
Abdi Farah, have to adopt a more inclusive and balanced leadership.” Are not
only misleading, but a complete expression of a partisan intellectual who has
set out chiefly to confuse the masses of readers who lack expertise in
sophistry with his superficial analysis of the politics of the State in
question.
The writer then proceeds with his innuendo and unleashes another
plethora of pejorative adjectives when he states with a semblance of finality
that Salvakiir is “taciturn” and “morose”. One can only wonder what kind of
passion would turn the learned friend into such a fluent polemicist and
pitifully fill his schooled head with that magnitude of invectives, but he soon
unmasks his concealed orientation when he finally blabs about his very interesting
admiration of the militancy embodied by Machar. To him, his ‘hero’ Machar is
“ebullient” and “charismatic”. Let me be modest and consider him a rebel
sympathizer at best and at worse, a hired goon who is under instructions to
attract sympathies for the enemies of South Sudan and their illicit ideologies.
As an interested observer I keep asking how the over-misrepresented
idiosyncratic values of President Kiir, can be used to create reasons and
excuses for Dr. Machar and his allies, to suspend the constitution of South
Sudan which protects the institution of the Presidency and outlines lucidly the
procedure of acceding to such an office. But lest I digress and begin to wade
through the same mud of emotional expression, allow me to present the facts as
they truly are.
First, the notion that the author seeks to create here that
there is a situation of ethnic war between the Nuer and Dinka and that the
government is supporting the latter against the former must be dismissed in the
strongest words possible. A history into the interaction between the two
communities reveals a truth that is very far from the earlier allegations.
The
Dinka-Nuer political affiliations date back to as early as the 1924 armed
conflict against the British colonial power. Ali Abdalatif and Abdalfadheel El
Maz (Dinka and Nuer respectively) organized a rebellion against the British.
The same collaboration existed between KerubinoKuanyin, a dinka and William
Nyuon, a Nuer in the 1983 mutiny in Bor and Ayod which inspired the creation of
SPLM/A. In 2005, John Garang, a Dinka and RiekMachar, a Nuer, reunited to sign
the CPA which provided leadership for the transitional Government of the
semi-autonomous territory until the abrupt demise of Dr. Garang later that
year. Even after the death of Garang, the two communities still worked together
with Kiir as the President and Machar as his vice until the end of the
transitional government’s tenure in 2010. Kiir then chose Machar to be his
running mate and together they won and led the country into voting for
secession in 2011. The two communities have also joined for wrong reasons. For
instance, after “the gang of two Doctors” led by Dr. Machar and DR. Lam Akol,
attempted and failed to overthrow Garang from the leadership of SPLM/A in 1991,
they were, joined by KerubinoKuanyin and Faustino AtemGualdit, who were both
Dinkas in 1993. The team then turned against Garang and the SPLM/A. The trend
was repeated in 2013, when a section of leaders rebelled against President
Kiir, the group that is led by Pagan Amun and Rebecca Garang (mostly Dinka)
have joined the Machar led rebel group (predominantly Nuer)
So honestly, how can we justify that the civil strife in
South Sudan is ethnically motivated. Or maybe I should explain further!
How can
it be possible that the “Dinka-dominated” government can be conducting state
sponsored extermination campaign against the Nuer when there are Nuer People in
very key government positions in the SalvaKiir administration? Governors John
K. Nyuon (Jonglei State), Simon Kun Puoch (Upper Nile State) and Dr. Joseph
NguenMonytuil (Unity state), James Hothmai, (Chief General Staff) and
MagokRundial (Speaker of National Assembly) are all Nuers and they are in full
support of the Government. The same, is true with several academics and Army
officers from the Nuer ethnic group. Is the author therefore suggesting that
these respectable leaders have conspired with the Government to kill their own
people?
And now back to his ridiculous argument that Kiir lacks
charisma, is morose and very taciturn. Who but an uninformed person can claim
that a President, who campaigned and won elections in a democratic process is
deficient of charisma? Of course, I have restrained the temptation to question
the author’s judgment with vehemence and instead assume that it was a typing
error. However, that doesn’t in anyway stop me from informing the author,
especially now that I am convinced beyond any reasonable doubt that it will be
an injustice on him to be left in the darkness. Lexically, the Term charisma is
used to describe the ability to influence and inspire people by our own
personal qualities. Now which other way would show a charismatic person better
than winning a spiritedly contested presidential election with a landslide
victory of 93% of the total votes cast? Is the author suggesting that Kiir won
through guess work or some African black magic? I hope not.
Equally, I can’t stop laughing at the comparison that this
author draws between the President (whom he bedevils) and Machar (who is seriously
deified). Machar who has neither contested nor won any election, but has a
mucky record of rebellion and betrayal against friends, has now turned an angel
worthy of our glorification. Very funny!
In 1991, Machar betrayed Garang and even attempted to
dethrone him. In 1994, he dismissed his fellow rebel Dr.LamAkol from
SPLA-Uited.In2001, he walked out of Bashir with whom he had signed a peace
agreement in 1997. Why then should it come as a surprise to anybody that in
2013, Machardid, what he has an addiction for? Anybody supporting Machar’s
actions is actually a supporter of a bloody and manipulative tribalist who
hides under the guise of nationalism to sow seeds of division and discord among
South Sudanese Nationals. Or shall I remind the world again, that it is the
same Machar who in 1991, perpetrated the Bor Massacre in which 2000 Dinkas were
killed?
President Kiir might not be the darling of some of us, but
let us be fair in the way we tackle the situation in South Sudan, lest we
incite our brothers and sisters against one another through irresponsible
journalism and simplistic approach to the already very delicate situation in
the Country.
Nyakiya Nyakiyaism is a Senior Political Scientist and Member of Board of Directors, Intellectus Cosnultancy. He is also the the founder and author of the 'Nyakiyaism' school of thought
