Standing for Sovereignty of Your Own Country or You Sacrifices it to Foreigners? The Case of Handing Over South Sudan to UN Trusteeship.
By Mangong Mawien Madut, Kampala, Uganda.
July 27, 2016(Nyamilepedia) —– The political advocacy on handing over South Sudan to UN trusteeship is not longer confidential. Interested people are making officially in various media outlets. Few of our countryman like, Pagan Amum and rest who didn’t show up publicly advocated for taking over of South Sudan by UN.
This political approach taken and applied by Pagan Amum and rest of South Sudanese public figures lobbying secretly for UN Trusteeship to take over is more of abuse of sovereignty of Republic of South Sudan as a State, political authority and her people as well. Under the concept of sovereignty, no state has the authority to another state how to control its internal affairs. Sovereignty gives absolute rights unless there are considerable circumstances of failure.
All states ranging from tiny island of Micronesia to large countries like Russia have equal right to function as state and make decisions independently about what occurs within their own borders. Therefore, since all states are equal in that sense, no state or an organization like UN have right to interfere with internal affairs of another state e.g. South Sudan when there is yet a sense of leadership and appreciated security although it is not maximum as the case may concern.
In regard to insecurity, no country is absolutely secured including USA itself. There have been a loss of lives in cities of America and world didn’t take it into consideration to brand US government as a failed. Therefore, it is supposed for the world to be honest at least and show a sense of fair global leadership rather than being prejudices to affairs of South Sudan. The political, social, economical and leadership exercise in South Sudan should have be judged with respect of its privileges as an independent state which had its own land, people with their leaders.
Moreover, and significantly, central point of article is ever rational minded South Sudanese to deeply and critically love this country by opposing the ongoing political conspiracy of foreign intervention despite us being bitter to leaders. Our political and social affiliations cannot allow us to push this country to our resources enemies. Let us swallow the pain politicians dragged us into and defend the privileges of Republic.
Iam empathizing that it is high time for people of South Sudan to embrace unity and reject geopolitical divider/true enemy’s ideas. The conspiracy of regime change of government headed by Gen. Salva Kiir Mayardit doesn’t only affect this current generation but including future generations in various aspects vitally resources specifically. Don’t forget that future generations of South Sudan will find a country which is an empty resourcefully irrespective of being naturally blessed with resources if you support foreign military intervention and allow them to enter into your country. An intervention to South Sudan had no substantial legal standing rather than regional and world foreign policy national‘s interest in South Sudan and pure global politics.
Frankly speaking, I feel that we should support no to intervention on ground that South Sudan ‘s natural resources belongs to South Sudanese ‘s current and future generations and therefore doesn’t deserve to be taken by foreigners in our presence just because Salva Kiir Mayardit have done this and so. Realistically, Salva Kiir Mayardit is not South Sudan, he is a president and his time will come to leave this job and country will remain as South Sudan without changes like the way it was founded. Therefore, it is reasonable for people of South Sudan to reject the AU proposal for the sake of protecting their resources.
These orientations and teachings on the ground to citizens that President Salva Kiir is a dictator, weak, incompetent, had failed the country and therefore he deserves removal from power is falsified and deceptive techniques which are employed to let citizens frustrated and massively launch uprising against their won government like what happened to some countries before. The rationale behind such geopolitical orientations to citizens of targeted president is to dislodge him/her from leadership and bring in unpopular person to replace removed head of state.
Furthermore, It surprises when one hear some people calling for foreign intervention, to them they thought what they are after is best alternative to leadership of Salva Kiir as they indispensably believe and not knowing that the super power States they are helping politically in an invading South Sudan had before done the same thing to other sovereign nations and succeeded to topple governments, later on the result they left in those countries was chaos rather than on what they use to preach.
To them, powerful nations believe overthrowing labeled hostile government is a significant goal achievement which is not limited only on changed regime in power but instability of those country including poverty, state of rising, insecurity, refugees’ crises, violent extremism, economic volatility, political disorder and division and an absolute destabilization of State.
Well, is this what people calling for foreign intervention wants to happen in South Sudan? It really disturbs if people who largely benefited corruptly from South Sudan were the first people to call for an invasion. However, the political differences with President Salva Kiir should not drive them to make such mistakes.
Significantly, what is that new to be lectured to people like Pagan and Majak who were then members of armed struggle SPLA about patriotism and nationalism of country they fought for? A true and loyal SPLA officer who joint the bush purposely and recall how South Sudanese suffered can’t reason to compromise the sovereignty of this country to our enemies who are sponsors of sectarianism, tribalism, both local and international media to make propaganda against government of Republic, opposition, insurgence, inciting ethnic tension and destabilization of South Sudan. As matter of facts, such strategies were applied in countries they differed ideologically and later they succeeded to remove the ruling leaders and enforced.
These powerful countries who believe they are committed to realizing democratic ideals by supporting rule of law , constitutional reform, institutions building and civil society, democratic political system on global world are just lying instead they are using such ideas to cover up their foreign policy political interests and it is what is exactly happening in South Sudan.
But what is, disappointing and is uncontrolling of our domestic political conflicts. The differences on leadership affairs nationally among public officials/ leaders could have not engine interests of countries which already had political, economical, social and ideological interest on South Sudan. We must learn from that.
To be honest, the world states behind a proposal of military intervention want to use humanitarian interventionism as a license to change a regime which politically, economically and ideologically became hostile since it assumed power in 2005 in surrendering her virgin resources to them (exceptional world States). They are making this to legitimize an invasion. They want to gain access to natural resources in case they succeed in invading this country, control nationalism of South Sudanese despite being independent state, control economy and political ideology as well.
Some elite nations are working hard to fight for leadership to someone who is not popular to lead South Sudan who importantly later becomes political principal for their foreign policies national‘s interest on our country affairs compare to one who is popular in his own country and nationalizing everything first before them.
Indeed, our government is not a perfect enough since it came into power but we cannot stop Standing for Sovereignty of this country just because regime in leadership had massively led us down in some essence issues and shamelessly sacrifices it to foreigners due to our own personal, political differences and interests etc. In addition, we need to be careful with recommendations given by foreign writers like Princeton Lyman and others; their recommendations are dangerous to political stability, periodical existence of resources for generations, economical independence and unity of the people of South Sudan. Thanks.
Author is Mangong Mawien Madut, a legal affairs secretary of South Sudanese students Union in Uganda. He is in fourth year, School of law and a part time blogger and columnist. Reach him on +256782229324/ +256752949345 or firstname.lastname@example.org