Contributor's Peace Process Peter Lokarlo Ngrimwa Politics South Sudan

Troika’s Application of Opinionated and Insular Benchmark In Resolving South Sudan Conflict Is Impractical

By Peter Lokarlo Ngrimwa,

Former lecturer,

Graduate School of Business and Law (GSBL)

RMIT University,


US President, Barack Obama, meets regional leaders over South Sudan conflict(Photo: file)
US President, Barack Obama, meets regional leaders over South Sudan conflict(Photo: file)

Jan 28, 2016(Nyamilepedia) —- Recalling the unanimous consensus reached at by two of the overbearing yet indifferent Troika outfit, namely the United Kingdom and the United States of America demanding that the SPLM in Opposition and the current authorities in Juba formed a transitional government of National Unity (TGNU) as soon as possible without first resolving the controversial and burning issues or even making reference to the unconstitutionality of the 28 states that the President of South Sudan has proclaimed on the recommendation of the outrageous tribal coterie known as the Jeng Council of Elders (JCE). The JCE is the tribally constituted group of egotistical and blinkered men from the dominant Dinka ruling cluster who have regrettably become the de facto government of South Sudan that presents a perturbing portrait in the country today. The president of South Sudan is under the sway and constant surveillance of this group that did create the 28 states in the country.

Worryingly, the duo Troika members whose individual countries normally pride themselves on lengthy runs of constitutional practices and centuries of liberal democracy, have today fallen prey to the propaganda machine of the government of South Sudan in Juba, such that their application of opinionated and insular benchmark in resolving the South Sudan conflict does seem extremely perilous.

The White House and 10 Downing Street must understand that at the moment, they are handling an intricate and one of the most ticklish African political problems that emphatically lends excessive credence to tribal extolment accompanied by intrinsically embedded and unrestrained sense for brutality – an exploit far removed from the contemporary practices of civilised norms. Troika should employ the existing template (Peace accord document) consistently and not haphazardly to rectify the woe. It must also be emphasised that the ceasefire, demilitarization and the creation of an interim constitution must be prioritized before the creation of a transitional government.

Troika members and their countries must equally be informed that the creation of the 28 states in South Sudan was designed by the JCE coterie with a subterranean intent and content, and that is to politically position this hegemonic tribal entity with limitless ambition for dominance at a vantage point in an attempt to capture power in a supposedly emerging democratic ambience at the expiry of the transitional government in 30 months’ time.

If the 28 states decree is implemented, the sluice-gate would be thrown wide open and a perpetual bloody conflict would ensue in the entire country, as one ethnic community, the Dinka would have arbitrarily curved out 12 states for themselves with all the oil resource at their disposal, while leaving 16 states for the rest of South Sudanese that make up the remaining 63 tribes living in the country. The conspiracy was also designed to balkanize the legendary Greater Equatoria region into JCE’s “manageable” enclaves, and that is certainly a recipe for a further civil war which unacceptable and must thus be halted.

This concealed manoeuvre by the JCE that the Troika group of countries have yet to fully comprehend represents a real menace to the people of South Sudan. Hence, the false argument being trumpeted by the JCE-managed repressive police state and its bureaucracy in South Sudan that the creation of the 28 states in the country was a popular demand by South Sudanese, is futile, deceptive and an idealistic postulation that does have a counterpart in the realm and confines of integrity. Thus far, there has been no plebiscite or referendum conducted in the country to determine the size of South Sudanese for and against the 28 states. This is simply a hoopla campaign mounted by the government and the JCE to impose their unidimensional and narcissistic fixation on South Sudanese. The SPLM-IO would certainly not accept this apparent risk of rushing into forming the TGNU without clear safeguards that ensure the viability of the government once it is constituted for the next 30 months’ period.

Lamentably, the Ambassador of the of the UK in South Sudan has fallen short of understanding the format of the South Sudan peace implementation formula and the real nature of the government in Juba and has accordingly missed the point by succumbing to hyperbolic counsel from the regime in Juba, that the transitional government could be formed in the country without the need for strict implementation of the contents of the peace agreement concluded between the SPLM-IO and the government of President Salva Kiir, and that would still be fine. In his unmindful comment as the official representative of the British government in South Sudan, Mr. Timothy Morris stated to the expectant media houses in Juba that the parties to the peace agreement should go ahead with the implementation of the peace agreement and discuss the shape of the country later, and that the issue of the 28 states should not delay the implementation of the peace agreement. Mr. Tim does seem to suggest that the peace document is of less value as long as both parties are genuinely committed to forming a government of National unity and that Troika has the mandate to impose what it deems fitting to install peace in South Sudan. The UK Ambassador should be prepared to educate South Sudanese and name the countries in the world that are governed without a constitution?

The Ambassador must understand that we are not dealing here with a sort of a “Versailles Treaty” in which the victors of the war against Germany in the WWI had the sole prerogative of dictating what the vanquished state had to do. This is an African problem rooted in tribal intricacies and power rivalries that you have minimal or no clue about. The debacle can only get resolved via the available roadmap at the disposal of the contending parties, that is, the document of the peace accord. The UK alongside other pertinent parties should only superintend the implementation of the peace agreement as given and no circumvention of its articles and clauses permitted.

After all the UK had been a party to the current shambles in South Sudan. It is worth recalling that in 1922 in the course of its colonial occupation of the former Sudan, the UK had imposed a rule known as the “Closed District Ordinance”, contained in the so-called “Southern Policy” document which effectively restricted the movements of the people of north Sudan to the southern part of the country and vice versa, only to dismantle the bantustanization rule in 1947 which created a much bigger problem of integration of the two parts of Sudan. Similarly on the 19 August 1955 a civil war had already broken out in country prior to Sudan securing its formal political independence in January 1956. Britain had decided to leave the mess behind and left Sudan embroiled in gruelling civil war that had to end half a century later, in 2005. Today Tim Morris has the audacity to tell us how the South Sudan’s peace accord should be implemented when his country, the UK had desolately failed to demonstrate one sixty years ago.

Furthermore, both the British Ambassador and Mr. Duddridge, the UK Minister for Africa Affairs who share the same view on the South Sudan’s conflict should be seriously reminded that the peace agreement signed in August 2015 provides among other matters, the Ceasefire between the combatting forces; the 25km radius Demilitarization of Juba and other cities and the evacuation of hostile foreign fighting forces in South Sudan, namely the Justice and Equality and other rebel groups arrayed against the government of President Omar Hassan Al Bashir in Khartoum. Thanks to President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni of Uganda for being familiar with the nature and mechanics of the conflict in South Sudan as demonstrated by his order to withdraw the Ugandan military previously deployed in South Sudan to support the government of President Kiir from being militarily defeated by the SPLM-IO’s combat forces.

Finally, it defeats logic to emphasize on speeding up the formation of the transitional government as being dictated by Troika without first ensuring the execution of the aforementioned matters. The IGAD body and the AU should consistently focus on the implementation of every article and clause of the agreement as enshrined in the peace accord document and above all ask President Kiir to rescind his decree of the 28 states for the benefit of ushering in peace and stability in South Sudan.

Peter Lokarlo Ngrimwa*

Former lecturer,

Graduate School of Business and Law (GSBL)

RMIT University

Emily McPherson Building 13,

379 – 405 Russell Street Melbourne

VIC 3000 Melbourne


Related posts

Opinion: Advice to US and International Community on South Sudan Peace


SPLA Incurred Huge Casualties On Jebel Attacks, Gunshots Subside Amid Huge Defections!


Nyamal Koang Dei: “Under this Nip tree I will build a library”


Tell us what you think

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: