Written By. Deng S. Elijah
“Robecca Nyandeng de Mabior, presidential advisor and member of the Political Bureau, however responded on Bakhita radio FM on Tuesday, rebuking those who were still recalling the past differences in 1991 in order to blackmail others, urging them to instead address the current challenges facing the party and its leadership.” ST
Photograph: Ho/Reuters, Guardian
December 15, 2013 (British Columbia, Canada) – As a nation, we are all aware that the National Liberation Council (NLC) meeting has been postponed several times. The chairman, knowing that he has been on the loose end, tried all means within his capacity that would guarantee him a win but all were denounced by his good critics. Mr. chairman proposed that the voting would be done, traditionally, by the show of hand or, preferably, he would hand picked 5% of the voting delegates but all were similarly criticized. At the time, if implemented, these old school proxies would have had serious repercussions on those who would have misread the slogan of Mr. chairman. The intentions of such propositions were dark and gloomy. As alleged, it was feared that the president wouldn’t have spared those who would have voted against him in the NLC election. Tit for tat. As a result, hundreds of army Generals and police Commissioners were relieved, dully powers of the former vice president were stripped, governors were unconstitutionally removed and the party secretariat was at odd with its mandates. All these strategies were enforced to lay the infrastructure that dissolved the cabinet in July. Now, all these events are archived and ready to be revisited; at least, now that we are running out of thoughts and authoritative powers. Unfortunately, the last pages of both the transitional constitution and the SPLM constitution have been turned. Yet, the receiving camp has solidified, more vocal and revitalized. So, what would we expect?
The president missed a great opportunity in May. If the NLC were convinced in May, at least, one of the governors who were unconstitutionally removed and some of the former cabinet members would have sympathized to vote for the chairman. Today, it is different. Most of the Politburo and NLC senior members have lost their positions (ignited to fight), South Sudan ranked 5th in World corruption index, new $4.5 billions “gost” loan repayments (to who and why?), corruption accusations, attempts to dissolve the SPLM structures, training of “more trusted” private presidential guards, falling out with the army Generals and Secretary General, denial of Abyei results, poor corporate agreements, leaning on NCP, rebels and oppositions, contentions in the army, derailing foreign relations, unpaid public servants, and the press-referenced autocratic policies.
As the nation continues to sink and the party scrambles, his Excellency would only win dissents, if elections were free and fair. It is a free market principle and thus, the chairman should know his position. As the chairman and the president you are responsible for the prosperity and/or the collapse of both the party and the nation. Cheap politics and insults are not alternatives to virtue, in this case. Otherwise, the only straw that the regime would hold onto would be the worse case cancellations of any possible election, including the current NLC meetings. However, the regime has no manpower or sufficient capitals to sustain autocracy in the hostile and volatile South Sudan, unless otherwise. The only remaining alternatives are what we are currently witnessing: frustrations, insults, claims and accusation. All these are self-defeating. If you can’t beat them, join them!
As it seems, every politicians would wish today to have been born by the SPLM, which would be paradoxical, because such politicians would be too young to today claim the parent, the SPLM. To circumvent this paradox, his Excellency, the chairman, has tried to justify his seniority and why he would be the best fit to run the show; however, his justification is self-contradictory and unnecessary. A piece of his argument goes as:
“Since I went to bush and took up arms in 1960s, I have never deviated from the struggle and I have never betrayed the cause of my people and I will never do it”.
It is true that Salva Kiir joined the Anya-anya moment in the late 1960s, however, Anya-anya fought sacrificially for self-determination. Therefore, the chairman deviated and betrayed the Anya-anya when he joined SPLM camp in 1983 to only turn the SPLM tanks against his own comrades, the brave anya-anya separatists who stood the odds without much external aid. Salva Kiir did not only betray the movement but also its vision, separation. To make it worse, Mr. Chairman[Kiir] deviated from the SPLM in 2004, at the verge of CPA, when the South Sudanese needed his contribution the most. His concluding statement, on the last day, of the 2004 mediation, shared by none other than his current deputy chairman, Dr. Riek Machar, made it crystal clear that Mr. Kiir deviated for his own self-interest and the interest of his camp. He felt insecure and believed that Dr. Garang segregated his camp. This statement is what is still consuming the SPLM party today.
“I don’t agree with cdr. wani that these rumours were created by the enemy. There are people among us who are more dangerous than the enemy. I must warn the chairman that nimeiri was made to be unpopular by his security organs. those who are misleading you and giving you false security information about others will suffer with you together or leave with you. The government, which is going to be led by you must include all” 29/11/2004 Rumbek minute.
The then deputy chairman [Kiir] was neither disgruntled for a national discourse nor any beneficial vision. Thus, Mr. president should not corrupt the dustbin of a history that he is party of. None of the current politicians is angelic and using the dustbin of our history to clean the current phenomenons is not only destructive but, at most, premature!
If the nation continues its failing path it won’t really matter, whether certain politicians were born by the SPLM, or not. What would suffice is how and when the politician would collaborate, corporate and tolerates to restore and repair the despair. The party and the nation still have so many expectations from both camps, and whichever camp would demonstrate political and intellectual maturity, and be persistence, would carry the golden plate of our freedom. Start marketing yourselves. Our citizens, although submerged by the current crises, are still flexible to rally behind whoever wins. Let the democracy takes it course!
On the last note, the current politics, although it is rougher than a hockey game, is still better than expected. The pulling out of the senior SPLM officials was also anticipated given that both camps remain in a deadlock. The later scenario is usual, while the former is developmental. We are at the preliminary stage of our democracy, and the world would only hope for a progress.
The key to the national prosperity is in your own hand. Save the party, save the nation and not the otherwise!
The author, Deng S. Elijah, can be reached at dengsimon2000 at yahoo dot com