Proposal for autonomous Regional Governance Structure
Policy paper, Aug 9, 2021
Forward
The territories currently known as South Sudan existed as three separate provinces under Khartoum until were brought together under one administration by the Addis Ababa agreement of 1972, which formally established the three regions of Southern Sudan as one united Autonomous administration known as the regional High Executive Council to be ran by its own sons. However, the Regional Executive Council did not last long, the dinka politics of tribalism, domination, and corruption made it impossible to continue as one region, but crumble by further decentralization of the region to three Autonomous regions to free the rest of the tribes from the dinka greed for power and corruption, which later came to be known as Kokora.
In 1983 immediately SPLM/A was started as war of liberation of Sudan, although people in the Greater Equatoria region were skeptical that it was because of the Kokora policy given the fact that the first graduates of the movement who entered the region did a lot of damage to the population, causing further division and mistrust. However, after persistent insistent by the SPLA leadership that the war was a liberation war from the Arab oppressor, all nationalities in Southern Sudan joined in massive numbers and war ensued until it ended up in the comprehensive peace agreement of 2005, in which South Sudan was given a choice to make after 6 years of the agreement through referendum to choose between continued unity with the North or secession. Again, the three regions were brought together for the second time in another Autonomous arrangement and this time known as the government of Southern Sudan while there was a government of national unity for the whole country.
These governments were tasked with the responsibilities of coordinating the implementation of the agreement in letter and spirit with the final stage of the referendum. Accordingly, the referendum was conducted in the Southern provinces in 2011 in which 98.8% voted for secession of Southern Sudan, and on July 9, 2011, the South became an independent country known as South Sudan.
Although the country became independent, South Sudanese were surprised to see their country plunged into an ethnic civil war in which thousands of people lost their lives as result of struggle for power and resources control between the Dinka and the Nuer tribes. Today the country is in complete turmoil and in a state of collapse in which experts characterize it as a failed state. Therefore, there is an on-going search to find a solution for the country’s chronic problems which are rooted in ethnic governance and domination affecting the rest of the South Sudanese polity.
Background to the Problem
Shortly after the formation of the autonomous government of southern Sudan, in 2005 the interim constitution of Southern Sudan set out an initial framework for inclusive and participatory governance focused on serving its diverse people equally. Among other things the constitution: –
- recognizes the multi-ethnic, multicultural, multi-lingual, multi-religious, and multi-racial identity of the country (article (2))
- Guarantees the right of every citizen to take part in any level of government (article (30(1))
- Ensures that the composition of the government in Southern Sudan takes into account the ethnic, regional and social diversity of South Sudan (article 39(4))
- Guarantees the equitable sharing of the wealth of South Sudan among all levels of government (article 40(3))
- mandates that the ministers of the GoSS are selected with regard to the need for the inclusiveness based on the ethnic and regional diversity and gender (article 117(3))
At independence these provisions were reaffirmed in the transitional constitution of the Republic of South Sudan 2011; however, a section of Dinka chauvinists were quick to convince the Dinka government to drop these constitutional requirements in favour of a tribal agenda designed to subjugate and oppress the people of South Sudan. Soon the constitution was personalized in favor of a tribal advisory group in total disregard of appointed political advisors which later became clear that the primary objective was the development of a strong economic power, as well as strengthening military and political control of the Republic of South Sudan.
To achieve this goal, repression by institutions of terror, and other policies of subjugation against other tribes became a living reality in South Sudan. The country is therefore developing into a Dinka state resting on an institutionalized system of injustice based on tribal and ethnic chauvinism, a fact that has led to the instability in the new state.
Application of tribal policies and strategies such as recruitment of tribal cadres into the security services, formation of tribal militia, organized insecurity, domination in all aspects of public life, corruption, marginalization, and a strategically developed roadmap for subjugation, are the common tools which have led to the breakdown of law and order in our country.
The tribal president, once decorating one of his tribemates into a high-ranking position, said that he could not find people who know how to work, but he could find people who know how to eat. This claim is misplaced and does not constitute any truth regarding employment of South Sudanese to senior government positions in the Republic of South Sudan. This statement alone is a big shame to the nation as it implies that thousands of competent South Sudanese who are however neglected because of their tribal background, are to be found nowhere, so ending up hiring incompetent people. It was better to say I have not found a Dinka who knows how to work, but all I could find are the ones who know how to eat because not all the South Sudanese are Dinka who would rather eat than to show a professional responsibility, as it is the case currently in our country. The consequence of this tribal drive is therefore the destruction of the South Sudanese state by an assembly of incompetent tribal cartel who have deepened themselves in amassing personal and family wealth through corruption, and repression of the other nationalities. Those liberal dinkas who choose to oppose these crude and segregative policies quickly hit walls. They are either eliminated or forced to leave the country
Consequently, the South Sudanese state has disintegrated into complete anarchy characterized by arms in the hands of civilians everywhere without any policy or intent to correct the situation. No public services of any sort for the last 15 years in power. Citizens are wholly dependent on relief and/or NGO limited services, no salaries for public officials with the exceptions of the looting Dinka clique in the executive and in the so-called national security. No economic growth of any kind as they have put their trust in the flow of oil as a guaranteed source of wealth to sustain the interest of the clique. No infrastructural development of any sort and the old ones developed by the colonial regimes are left to deplete with the exception of the houses and the offices they occupy. A rational person begins to wonder for example how terrible Luri bridge on Juba Jumbo road which is an important life line to western Equatoria and beyond took lots of lives for travelers and businesses for many years, and no action taken, yet money is being looted and floating in the hands of companies with no realistic projects. Tribal wars of subjugation and over control of public resources are waged, creating unnecessary manmade disasters and human suffering and misery, human right abuses everywhere in the hands of tribal security and the list continues.
To sum up, since the founding of Southern Sudan, first as an Autonomous region in 1972, and in 2005, and later as a country in 2011, the Dinka tribe has continued to exercise absolute control and domination without accepting any system of governance which will not leave them in power. At this point it is better to call a spade a spade and fire a fire. The problems since the beginning of self-rule in South Sudan have been created by the desire and determination of the Dinka tribe to control and rule South Sudan permanently to the exclusion of other nationalities with no prospects for development. Dr. Hassan el Turabi a prominent Sudanese politician once said: “South Sudan will never be stable because of the Dinka tribe ego to rule without any development agenda” Although Dr. Turabi might have been considered an enemy at the time, however his claimed has been justified beyond doubt, as demonstrated by the fast and the present behavior of the Dinka elite.
While the objective of any government is to establish and maintain law and order without which the instrument of government could not operate smoothly, the Dinka regime in Juba is concerned with establishment of a tribal state characterized by insecurity, lack of accountability, looting and corruption. This has chartered the unity of the South Sudanese, and may lead to more rigorous decisions by other nationalities and the country could break apart. Regionalism therefore is the only feasible means of resolving the mess created by these tribal warlords.
Vision: peaceful and prosperous South Sudan
Goal: Establishment of Autonomous Regions in the Republic of South Sudan
Mission: Establishment of Regional Administrations by breaking the country into five autonomous Regions as the only feasible and viable means to stabilize, restore public life, and the current chaotic political and economic situation in the Republic of South Sudan
Objectives
- to design and formulate a strategic policy for Regionalization of South Sudan
- to solicit for a massive support for the establishment of Autonomous Regions in South Sudan
- to support and work for the implementation of the Regional system
- to solicit international support for the establishment of Autonomous Regions in South Sudan
Autonomous Regional Governance as envisioned by the proponents of Regionalism
Regional advocates believe that South Sudan needs a governance system with Autonomous regions while powers covering common interest are taken care of by a Coordinating Council as the best suited for addressing the current political failure and the endless conflicts in the Republic of South Sudan. The Autonomous Regional Executive Council for the Southern region of the Sudan from 1972 -1983 with some power revolution, and other modifications serve as the model for the proposed Autonomous Regions in the Republic of South Sudan. All autonomous regions are therefore envisioned to mirror powers equivalent to that of the Southern Regional government established by the Addis Ababa agreement of 1972, with additional powers and authorities to be devolved to them.
The proposed regional autonomy in this context is therefore different from the known federations including confederation and federal systems of governance. While Confederation is coming together of independent states governed by a common agreement of its members, and federalism is splitting of powers vertically between different levels of local governance framework, Regionalism in our context will be the horizontal splitting of sovereignty and powers of a state into Autonomous regions in a united South Sudan with cross cutting issues/interests assigned to a coordinating council. It is a local system which combines features of both confederation and federalism within a united country. It is therefore different from classical federalism of the western world in that it requires each person to render political and civil services to the people in his/her region, and the chaotic situation of South Sudan can only be fixed by this governance arrangement. Autonomous regions of South Sudan will not separate into independent international entities with powers to head their own foreign policies, however, it is intended to affect changes in internal freedom, structure of governance, law making enforcement processes, security and economic organizations.
- The design and believe for regionalism emanates from the following assumptions:
That regional arrangement must be understood as a political balance of constantly shifting centrifugal forces in our country, including regional and /or tribal loyalties, different historical experience, distinct form of economic specialization, differences of language, culture, population density as well as remoteness from the capital which are constantly the causes of the conflict in our country. Regionalism will move power away from the political centre in Juba to the Autonomous regions of our country as such it is the best governance option for the backward communities of South Sudan.
Regionalism is meant to prepare the people of South Sudan for permanent unity, as well as to enhance development. The People of South Sudan need to understand the importance of unity and coexistence, equality and humanity so that they will thereafter have a very strong federal union, to guarantee prosperity of our united country. Therefore, regions will work to fight tribalism and educate their people to diminish the perception of internal difference, encouraging loyalty to our nation, unifying the economy and centralizing political decisions.
Advocates for regionalism believe that every person loves his/her God given land such that the early formation of his/her physical, social, economic and political life is determined and shaped by that particular environment and that is why dead individuals are transported to their respective motherland for burial. It is also believed that God has made each land area distinct and unique that the principles of specialization apply to land capital. Therefore, if a land is suitable for animal production, the government should work to improve that land productivity suitable for animal production, instead of moving animals to lands that God has designed for a different purpose. There is no such thing as bad lands but all God given lands are suitable in one way or the other and with no complete distribution of God given natural resources that is why there is an international trade. Regionalism is designed to enable the productivity of each God given land to prosper; grabbing other people’s lands for grazing, settlement or any other purposes deprives those communities of their livelihood and is a recipe for non-ending conflict.
Advocates believe that every tribe in South Sudan is backward, and no way one tribe is superior to others. The assertion by some Dinkas that they are born to rule is a reflection of this backwardness, because not all members of a particular tribe are by nature rulers. In fact, history tells us that the only organized groups before colonialism within the territories of South Sudan having a centralized form of government were the Shilluk and the Azande tribes of Western Equatoria. The Dinkas had no government of any sort but were just scattered groups following witchcraft. It took the English very long time to find and develop traditional leaders to run their indirect rule in the Dinka territories. They never ruled anybody leave alone ruling themselves, therefore had no experience for leadership and that is why their governments are tribal, corrupt and below the minimum level of any recognized government. If the three million Dinkas are all rulers by this assertion, then probably nature must be biased towards them. The fact that John Garang, a charismatic leader, was dinka does not warrant the dinka to claim that they are equally the same like him in leadership; not all dinka are John Garang nor do John Garang stands for all Dinkas, and that is why there is chaos. Regionalism will enable training of regional leaders who will then use that experience to form a united South Sudan.
Advocates believe that each patriotic person likes his people, place of birth, the territory his parents originated from, and where his services can be more effective and recognized before thinking of a greater union. Warrap state for example where president kiir comes from is in total chaos from communal fighting, cattle rustling, politically induced violence, hunger, diseases etc., while kiir and his close relatives are enjoying a safe haven in a distant Bari land without regard to his own people. Regionalism will move political leaders near to their backyard to advocate for all people in their region, stop sectional killing, improve the economy of the people for equal development in order to enhance future coexistence of the people of South Sudan.
Advocates believe that tribalism is the main factor which causes diverging tendencies in South Sudan. Most South Sudanese are emotionally attached to their tribes, creating a tribal political leaning to the point that truth and justice become secondary considerations. Unless these tribal tendencies are improved, South Sudanese will not form a viable nation. Differences including cultural incompatibility, and practices such as domination, resources control, and promotion of corruption have always been the main reason for political disagreement in our country. Tribal practices have prevented many people from getting along and uniting to combat more relevant issues which concern all the polity hence the nation is divided and lacks real unity. Such divisions will bring nothing but continued conflicts, fear and instability for generations to come since there will not be any compromise in any peaceful and non-violent way. Regionalism therefore is the most suitable and the ideal governance system to tackle and reverse these uncompromising beliefs.
Therefore, proponents have proposed the South Sudan be divided into five (5) Autonomous Regional Executive Councils as follows: Western Bahr el Ghazal Regional Executive Council, Jieng Regional Executive Council, Equatoria Regional Executive Council, NAAT Regional Executive Council, and Northern Upper Nile Regional Executive Council.
Other believes on Regionalism
There was peace before the region became an Autonomous region in 1972
Before the three provinces in Southern Sudan became a united Southern region in 1972, there was peace with few elevated tribal problems as people lived in their respective provinces directly under Khartoum. Problems among South Sudanese emerged right with the formation of the Regional Executive Council in 1972 when Abel Alier was the president of the High Executive Council as the beginning of a government by South Sudanese as well as the beginning most problems associated with tribalism, nepotism, corruption and all sorts of evils in South Sudan. Therefore, South Sudan will only perform well when Autonomous regions are established first to accommodate regional interests and to gradually build and instill a spirit of national consciousness with gradual change in behavior for wider nationalism. Ok
Dinka determination to oppress other nationalities (Dinka nationalism)
There are many indicators and evidences to show that Dinka have been working and are working to convert South Sudan into a Dinka nation state to the total exclusion of other nationalities. A brief look at the history of South Sudan from the 1960s to the present can demonstrate this ambition. Dinka contradictions during the Ananya I movement, domination during Abel Aliers rule of the High Executive Council which brought Kokora as result, and the behavior of the Dinka fighters during the SPLA war of liberation can show clearly how the policy of domination and control progressed until the present. In the independent South Sudan, this policy became clear as it was officially spelled out in the Jieng development plan, the road map for achieving domination and implementation of this strategic document is clearly demonstrated in activities such as occupation of non-Dinka lands, control of all government and financial institution, targeting other large tribes such as the Nuer, land grabbing, building of tribal army and national security, and targeting of opposition are all instruments of subjugation contained in that document. Therefore, without the establishment of Autonomous regions, then it is a surrender of all other nationalities to Dinka control in the Republic of South Sudan.
No any viable governance option to address the current situation in South Sudan
Federal system of governance based on classical model has been echoed by many political circles in South Sudan as a viable option for addressing the governance issues in the country, however it is the believe of Regionalism advocates, after thorough analysis that classical federalism may not and shall not address the chronic problems of South Sudan for several reasons.
- Classical federal model is only successful in civilized societies such as the United States, America, Canada, German, Australia, Russia and other civilized nations, where the federal constitution and a very strong amending formula are respected. Infect some of these countries are a collection of immigrants who value themselves as equals, and civilized with no tribe or tribalism but aggregate on partisan political lines. They have the skills and knowledge to live public life in coexistence with each other. South Sudanese on the other hand are probably the most backward people in eastern Africa. Some South Sudanese believe in tribalism as the basis of their lives and organization, and therefore cannot constitute a civilized society which can embrace the practice and the requirements of a federal governance expected to solve problems in a collective and civilized way.
- In these civilized countries, order, the rule of law, respect for public institutions, and humanity are the bases of life, whereas in South Sudan the Dinka tribesmen believe in the use of intimidation, force and violence to advance their interests. They manifest themselves as warriors with a triblistic mentality, and therefore will never respect any legal framework being it in the form of constitution or any other agreement since their interest of domination and control is not saved by it.
- In classical federalism, no matter what, division of powers is done and /or whatever structure of leadership arrangement is made, the central government remains the most powerful, therefore Dinka with their ambition for dominance will always want to be rulers and will do everything possible including violence to take control. This will have rendered the struggle for equality useless and the circle of violence will continue endlessly. This can easily be understood by the actions taken by the Dinka people when general Joseph Lagu took over power in Juba from Abel Alier in 1978 in which South Sudan was put in chaos simply because a non-Dinka was in power.
- Classical federalism guarantees free movement of every person as well as pastoralists, and the free movement of pastoralists will be a great disadvantage to crop growers in our country as it is the case in Equatoria and Western Bahar el Ghazal. If this is allowed to continue, our country will remain permanently dependent on food exports from other countries.
- Classical federalism as it is practiced in the federated countries guarantees political participation of any citizen in a particular state/region regardless of his/ her origin, this will give opportunity for Dinka to claim peoples land and leadership as it is the case in Nimule and Mugali within the Madi corridor, therefore with classical federalism people will continue to lose lands as land occupation will continue.
- Classical federalism as proposed by other parties have entrusted the central government with more powers hence stronger than the would-be state governments and which will surely be of dinka domination, since they will be the majority, will use those federal powers to subjugate the state administration disrespecting the legal framework laid down as they have done with the current government in South Sudan to advance their interest.
- The proposed federalism has not stated clearly how it will deal with the issues of land grabbing, land occupation and settlement, movement of animals, residence tribal domination of the civil services of the federal institutions as the main causes of instability in the would be federal South Sudan.
- Many political circles have stated that federalism is a historic demand of the people of South Sudan. Yes, this was true as was the demand of the southern provinces in the 50s to be united with the rest of Sudan in a federal arrangement. However, the situation has changed, and the demand is now within Southern Sudanese themselves demanding federalism governance structure for our new country. However as stated above many indicators have shown that with the present level of human development we have achieved, the federal system is not the best alternative.
- The Dinka politicians, businessmen, generals, you name it have been economically empowered through the corrupt kleptocratic system in Juba, they are now the known billionaires of South Sudan, and will use these financial powers to control system structures of the proposed federal South Sudan.
- Infect history has shown that attempts for a federal system of governance in tribal societies of Africa have failed miserably. Most countries in west and central Africa dropped it due to violations and ethnic animosities.
Therefore, the model of federalism as envisioned by other parties seems more academic than practical as it has not suggested in-depth solutions to the most crucial issues confronting our country. Equally the so-called national dialogue recommendations which were directed by the government in Juba will never be respected or implemented as a solution to our impending danger of Dinka occupation and domination. Instead, it will make Dinka more powerful and to succeed in their plans and policies by using powerful National Federal Institutions to control South Sudan. Concepts such as colloquial presidency, and /or rotational presidency, and so will never succeed in our current setting where the Dinkas are in control with a vested aim to dominate. Federal system based on a classical model will instead build a strong cartel of corrupt people and the country is prone to abuse by those who do not want a system. Therefore, Autonomous regions are the only way forward in our endeavor for a durable and peaceful solution in the country.
The Dinka Regime in Juba has completely failed the country
It is clear to every South Sudanese that the current Dinka government in Juba has disintegrated into a tribal kleptocracy looting machinery, with little regard for even the basic services delivery. The Dinka elite are very much concerned with the economic empowerment of the few and power control in Juba to continue the oppression of the South Sudanese people. In the process the nation has disintegrated into anarchy and insecurity in which experts characterized it as a failed state. It is a regime that has failed to unite the people, identified as sectional and essentially tribal in organization. To break these chains of oppression, South Sudan must be broken into manageable and peaceful Autonomous units for the prosperity of the people.
Regionalism has been started by the Dinkas in their regions
Nationals from greater Equatoria region who were working with Non-Governmental Organizations in Dinka regions, were given 72 hours to Leave Bahr el ghazal and Jonglei in 2017 and later in Upper Nile in 2019. Letters threatening violence against them were displayed at the gates of all humanitarian organizations in those areas and they were warned to either leave or be eliminated. Following such threats, the humanitarian agencies complied and Equatorians were evacuated back to their region. Accordingly, 92 Equatorians were evacuated from Northern Bahr El Ghazal and 12 others from Jonglei state respectively. In 2020 the same practiced continued in Unity and Upper Nile states, and the governments in these states did not take any action against those demands which means they were in support of the eviction. This therefore indicates that South Sudanese are still not ready to live together in a unitary country, Regionalization of South Sudan is therefore to be completed as it has been practically begigan in some states.
Badly injured tribes may not any more live together with Dinka
The killing of about 20 thousand Nuer ethnicities in the capital Juba and afterwards other tribes who have stood up against genocide is something not to be under estimated. There is no guarantee that the Nuer and other tribes targeted by the Dinka regime will coexist in any political arrangement other than regionalism. The massacre of the Nuer in Juba will not eliminate any future potential revenge against the Dinka. Regionalism will eliminate any revenge and ethnic cleansing policies and make everyone peaceful and safe from revenge and further policies of Dinkanization in their regions
Broken unity and lack of trust among South Sudanese
The social fabric and unity of the South Sudanese people has been broken seriously by very many factors including war and atrocities on innocent people. The people of South Sudan may not forgive each other completely and may not forget what has happened to them. Certain tribes are in danger of extermination by larger tribes, and therefore there is completely no trust in each other. Regionalism is needed as a step to forget and forgive each other for future unified administration.
- Lack of the implementation of the peace agreement and acceptance of changes
The current agreement on the resolution of conflict in South Sudan is not being implemented, on the grounds that the current regime does not want changes to their established machinery for domination, marginalization and oppression of the masses of the people. This is a clear indicator for those who may still think that dinka will reverse their domination plan. Before it is too late regionalism must therefore be implemented to dismantle this corrupt institutionalized practice by the Dinka regime who called themselves the liberators of the country.
- Dinka unwillingness to change their policies or accept non-Dinka leader
Dinka are not ready to accept any system or any leader from the non-Dinka communities, and this can be clearly exemplified by the time when Joseph Lagu supported by Nimeiri took over power from Abel Alier, as the president of the High Executive Council in February 1978. After a few months, South Sudan was put in turmoil by the Dinkas! Dinka Students were instigated to fight in schools targeting Equatorians and non-Dinkas in the main schools around Southern Sudan in which students from Equatoria were killed in Rumbek and Juba commercial secondary school in Juba.
It instigated unrest so that the Lagu administration was seen as a failure and indeed most schools were closed. Lagu was removed and replaced by Peter Goutkuoth, a Nuer who did not even last long and Abel Alier was brought back for the second time. Therefore, any system of governance other than Regionalism can easily be sabotaged if the powers guaranteed by the constitution are not in their interest; Equally so there will not be any free and fair elections in South Sudan in the hands of this brute tribe, and this can be easily demonstrated by the elections of 2010 when it was rigged in favour of SPLM candidates in Central Equatoria, unity and Jonglei states causing George Ator rebellion. It is therefore an illusion that under Dinka there will be justice in the envisioned federal South Sudan.
Experience from the failure of the Regional Executive Council 1972- 1983
The failure of the Regional Executive Council of 1982 saved as remainder for the repeat of the current crisis in the Republic of South Sudan. The Regional Executive Council which demonstrated a unitary form of government for South Sudan failed in 1982 following the implementation of the policies of domination and oppression by the Dinka Bor of Abel Alier Kuai who are the worst and the most tribalistic of all Dinka in South Sudan. Regionalism of the Southern Region in 1982 was a form of federalism to allow each of the former three Provinces of Bahr el Ghazal, Equatorial and Upper Nile to become an Autonomous region to avoid domination and exploitation against other tribes by the dominant Dinka regime in Juba. Accordingly, after its implementation, peace was achieved in the then Southern region of the Sudan, although the Dinka elite strongly opposed the move.
Negative and Brute behavior of the Dinka people in non-Dinka lands
Continued incitement of hatred by using very offensive words and behavior against non Dinkas in the Republic of South Sudan is a very big contributing factor in diminishing unity, and the continuing problems in our country. Dinka openly disregard the contributions of other tribes in the liberation. For the Dinka, they are the ones who fought and liberated South Sudan from the Arab rule. However, it must be remembered that the SPLM/A war of liberation was a war for the liberation of Sudan, not South Sudan, and that was why there was a split in the movement, and that was why people all over the Sudan later joined in the struggle forcing the Sudan government to the negotiating table which culminated with the signing of the comprehensive peace agreement. South Sudan was therefore given the chance to decide if they want to separate or remain in the united Sudan through a referendum not a military victory. South Sudanese therefore participated in the referendum that finally brought the independence of South Sudan and therefore it is liberated through referendum not by a particular tribe.
Almost every family in South Sudan, the Nuba Mountains and the Ingessana hills lost a family member to the war of liberation of Sudan as it was envisioned by its founding leader Dr. John Garang and therefore all people should be treated with dignity and respect. Foreigners such as the Americans, who supported and recognized our struggle have been abandoned in favor of other countries which were fighting alongside the Sudan government. Equally the Ugandans, Eritreans and Ethiopians and many others in the region and beyond who supported and even fought alongside South Sudanese are being mistreated when they equally shed blood in the process of our liberation. Dinka has no remorse or appreciation for the good job done by others in their favor.
This behavior has caused and brought shame to all South Sudanese worldwide and has so far broken the unity and future hope for love and trust for each other. Whoever believes or is caused to believe that South Sudanese can live together for now without proper decentralization to Autonomous regions is deceiving him/herself of the truth about South Sudan. Regionalism will make each region to reposition itself for the sake of coexistence and greater unity of the people of South Sudan, and for the future generations to come
Dangers the state is bound to face without Regionalism
Advocates believe that, should South Sudan fail to agree and implement Regionalism
- Dinka will continue with their plan for Dinkanization of South Sudan where tribalism, land occupation, land grabbing will continue to its peak, and we will always remain in wars with each other with violence continuing forever
- South Sudanese will never build a South Sudanese nationality irrespective of tribe, ethnic group, regional or cultural grouping
- South Sudanese polity will be characterised by tribal and sectional politics as the main considerations governing national policies, economic opportunities, and social interactions and in the process disagreement continue as well as wars
- Total breakdown of government administration/machinery and anarchy will continue to flourish and may further disintegrate into stateless nations of continues conflict as is the case in countries like Somalia
- Communities that were once peaceful will become chaotic and dangerous to national coexistence
- Dinka communities continue to suffer sectional wars, hunger, and diseases
- powers will not be devolving to the periphery, and operation of the masses will continue.
- governments in Juba will continue to widen and strengthen its power base and tribal economic control, without regard to delivery of basic services and economic development
- Land occupation issues in Equatorial and other regions will never be addressed because it has given them freedom of movement and occupation of peoples’ land without due regard to native owners or the consequences of their occupation.
- South Sudan will remain food insecure and dependent from foreign countries as the whole South Sudan has become a ground for livestock grazing,
- South Sudanese will continue to live in refugee camps in the neighbouring countries while displacement will be a continuous process given endless conflicts
- we shall continue to live in situation that was once stated by splm/io comrade Nathaniel Perini who said “we are living in a situation of no war and no peace” a great and relevant statement to our current situation in the Republic of South Sudan
Conclusion
Regionalization of South Sudan into 5 autonomous regions is the only most viable option to address the current political, ethnic, cultural, social and economic problems which are the causes of injustice and the continued conflicts in the country given that other governance systems such as unitary, combination of unitary and federal have failed and classic federalism is doom to fail. It is the only solution left for ending the ever-enduring bad relationship between non-Dinka and the Dinka elite/ Council of elders with such a tied legal framework that never again a single tribe has the chance to abuse nor claim superiority over others.
Appendages
- Design of the Kokora Regions of Southern Sudan {conceptual Approach}
Accordingly, the following criteria were considered in designing the proposed Autonomous Kokora regions of South Sudan.
- Cultural similarities, practices, and harmony for a very long time
- Homogeneity of the ethnic groups, language, and economic activities
- Economic viability of each region and its sustainability
- History of peaceful coexistence and social ties
- Geopolitical considerations
Proposed Kokora regions
1) Equatoria Autonomous Region with provisional capital in Juba to comprise the former colonial districts of the Equatoria region/ and or province of Kapoita, Torit, Juba, Yei, meridi, Azara, Yabio and Tombura, with their boundaries as they stood on 1 January 1956. The Pibor administrative area due to cultural similarities has been proposed together with greater Equatoria as a single autonomous region. This cultural area is occupied by mainly Nilo Hamitic people who are mostly sedentary farmers and have a long history of coexistence and cultural similarity, historical background and peaceful coexistence, have similar origin and Juba Arabic is the main language of communications
2) Westerners I Bahar Ghazal Autonomous Region, to consist of the former colonial districts of Raga and Wau with its provisional capital in Wau. Local ethnic groups include the Luo, Ndogo Kresh, Bai Baggara Arabs and many other minor tribes. The region has similar history, and it is the only region in the country with significant number of Muslims and Arabs and was the area badly affected by the slave trade in the 19 century.
3) Northern Upper Nile Autonomous Region with its provisional capital in Malakal consists of the former states of Fashoda, Northern upper Nile, and Central upper Nile. The tribes inhabiting the northern corridor of our country are mainly a mixture of farmers and pastoralists, Muslims and Christians. This Autonomous region consists of the lands which constituted the first province founded by the Anglo Egyptian rule in 1906 in the pagan and Negroid South Sudan. Ethnic groups in this region have coexisted for centuries without problems other than the wars of liberation. It is economically viable as it is one of the oil rich regions of the country.
4) Naath Autonomous Region with provisional Capital in Nasir or Bentiu to consist of the former states of Maiwut, Lajor, Bieh, Akobo, Fangak, Gawaar, Southern Lich, Northern Lich and Ruweng . Ethnic groups in this area have coexisted for centuries without problem. The main economic activities of the region are livestock and subsistence farming. It is one of the oil rich regions in the country. The main languages spoken in the area are Nuer, Dinka, Arabic and several dialects.
5) Jieng Autonomous Region with its provisional capital in Rumbek consists of the former colonial districts of Rumbek, Tonj, Gogorial, Yirol, Aweil and Bor. This cultural region is located almost in the center of our country. The Jieng or monyjang constitute the majority in this region with a population of about 3 million making more than 25 tribal sections and subsections. They are pastoralists speaking one single Jieng language with variations in dialects. They have common cultural similarities and beliefs. This region is rich in animal production and is the main activity of the people. It is also an oil rich area in the center of our country.
The author of this policy paper can be reached through email at regionalismss@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.
