The undergoing Consultation Meeting between the two principals generates a glimmer of hope
Opinion,
By Lul Gatkuoth Gatluak
President Salva Kiir and main armed opposition leader Dr. Riek Machar
January 15th, 2020 (SSNN)—The undergoing consultation meeting in Juba, between the Parties has raised a glimmer of hope that the number of States and their Boundaries which has been a sticking point for several months may be determined by the parties to the Revitalized Peace Agreement.
The issue of States to governance South Sudan, has been hectic since 2014 when Dr. Riek Machar created 21 States and Salva Kiir created 28/32 States. Those two proposals sharply divided South Sudanese in their walks of live. Undeniably, everyone sees things from different angle. What someone see may alliance with whoever they support and oppose others view if they are their opponents or foes. In the issue of above mentioned States, those who support Riek Machar, believe his proposal is the best and those who support Salva Kiir believe his proposal is good. Among these two divergent sides, merging in solo dynamism. This week, all eyes, ears and tension is facing Juba as South Sudan leaders are congregating and converging in Juba for three day consultative meeting, aiming to iron out most critical outstanding issues that are seen as a blockade to the progress of R-ARCESS. The gathering is viewed as a final examination of their conscience to see whether they are actually putting their personal egos aside and prioritized civilian suffering. The outcome of the consultation will determine the real resolution of the conflict in the Republic of South Sudan, whether the parties will open a political space to implement the R-ARCSS. In their meeting last month, on December 1-4, 2019 to be exact, the parties had failed to agree on how many States the country should have during the two days meeting held in Juba and witnessed by the Deputy President of South Africa David Mabuza and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) special envoy to South Sudan Ismail Wais. This past Monday, Mr. Mabuza had shuttled to Juba again to oversee the deliberation on the contentious issue of the number of States and their boundaries as deadline for forming the unity government is approaching. The issue of States and their boundaries will definitely rekindle skirmishes among ethnic groups in many parts of the country if it’s not being result now, despite land grabbing issue one had listed below.
Precisely, the establishment of 28/32 States, was a move that is met with condemnations. In a brief analysis given by Douglas H. Johnson, an expert in South Sudan history, who immediately published an article on establishment of 2832 States, Johnson stated that, there is a need to define exact location of the boundaries given the fact that some ethnic groups’ land had been taken from them. According to him, in the State of Upper Nile, which has been divided into three States, (Latjor) for Nuer, (Western Upper Nile) for Shilluk and Dinka dominated (Eastern Upper Nile), Shilluk land of Malakal has been given to Dinka State of Eastern Upper Nile instead of being included in Shilluk Western Upper Nile. Previously between 2005 and 2011, Shilluk and Dinka clashed multiple times over the ownership of Malakal during (CPA) celebrations.
Currently, Shilluk are protesting the annexation of their land to Dinka. They have written extensively to the world’s powerful bodies such as United Nations, European Union, African Union, IGAD and its partners; but most importantly to Salva Kiir himself persuading them to let Salva reverse his infamous decree. Up to the moment, there is no positive respond toward their call for reversal. Salva seems to defy all voices that clamoring and calling upon him to recall the decree. One would like to assert, government ignorant and throwing their grievances away as rubbish is a wreck without immediate repair.
Beside Shilluk land, part of Nuer land is annexed to Dinka Eastern Upper Nile even the Upper Nile oil has been given to Dinka. Moreover, Maban in the East has been included in the so-called Eastern Upper Nile State. Even Burun and Koma who have previously been parts of Pagak, Maiwut and Longechuk, had been included to Dinka State. One do not sure how katin, Kisgille, Dajo and other towns that lined up with Pagak, Maiwut and Longechuk respectively, can be taken away to be merged with Eastern Upper Nile of Dinka!
In unity State which he has been divided into three States included, Northern Liech State, Southern Liech State and Ruweng State, Nuer land of Mayom and other surrounding areas attached to Dinka counties of Pariang and Abiemnhom has been annexed to Dinka Ruweng State. Even the oil fields has been taken from Nothern and Southern Liech States and annexed to above mentioned Dinka territory, this area is an awaiting time-bomb. There is no doubt that Nuer will resist giving their ancestral land away to their neighbors because someone has said so.
Then in Jonglei State which he has now been divided into four States, Jonglei, Wesrtern Bieh, Eastern Bieh and Boma; each one of these States is roughly defined by ethnicity. For example, Western Bieh he had created, contains many Dinka settlers among the Gawar Nuer, and the border between Bor District and Eastern Bieh has had many mixed villages. Hence, current division that want to separate those who have been collaborated may danger their collaboration. Moreover, former Pibor County that had now been established as Boma State, had different groups with Murle being the majority over Anuak of Pochalla and Anuak who is minority in Akobo need to stick together with their brothers in Pochalla. Such a division also has another question mark from Anuak people.
Johnson further stated, “There is no clear pattern in the designation of new States.” To him some of the new State boundaries run along the old provincial boundary lines. For instance, Western boundaries of the two liech States, follow the old upper Nile-Bahr el-Ghazal boundary. The northern boundaries of Terekeka, Amadi, Mandi and Ghudwe States follow the old Equatoria- Bahr el-Ghazal boundary. Then the northern boundaries of Terekeka, Imatong and Namorunyang States follow the old Equatoria-Upper Nile boundary. However, Johnson indicates some older colonial ethnic boundaries are retained. He listed Imatong, Namorunyang, and Bor States as those States that appear to follow the old colonial lines as of 1.1. 1956 Districts. In Bahr el Ghazal, Aweil North and Aweil West counties formerly part of Northern Bahr el Ghazal State, have now been combined with Raga County to form Lol State. That State has some disputes between different ethnic groups that live there.
Johnson continue that new State boundaries will increase internal conflicts, such as the one between Apuk and Aguok in their newly separate State of Gogrial East, or between the feuding sections in Western and Eastern Lakes States. Another uneasy corridor is the cross-border between Lakes and Unity States, oftentimes, raids occurred between Southern Liech and Western and Eastern Lakes, those kind of skirmishes will eventually increase despite 28 States’ creation.
Base on Douglas’s analysis, one may conclude that, the issue is very complicated, which mean, without genuine multi party dialogue, 28/32 States will greatly increase the possibility of a violent eruption that would destabilize the country again.
As the reader may aware, during Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) implementation, technical Adhoc Committee were formed to precisely demarcate and delineate the North-South borderline as of 1st January 1956 with technical assistance from relevant national and international expertise. Although these committee were faced with a lot of problems but their appointment was an effective move toward CPA implementation. Equally, Southern Sudan ten States were demarcated base on the same formula.
Today if South Sudanese people want to create more States as such proposal would be on the majority of people’s mind and heart, an Ad hoc technical committee could be established first to provide detailed cartographical and mapping with references from Southern Sudan borderlines as of 1st January 1956. South Sudanese nationals and international experts can work together to map the country and demarcate its boundaries after all parties agree on the number of the States the country would need to create.
Salva Kiir’s controversial 28/32 States, is a trouble in awaiting given that there is no clear information on the location of the boundaries of the new States and counties. There is more confusion than there is solutions, given that Salva did not give details of why he created 18 more States other than saying “SPLM/A vision was to bring towns to people.” Well, “SPLM vision was bringing towns to people” but not dividing South Sudanese people on their ethnicity or annexing some ethnic groups’ land and give it to others.
Furthermore, comprehensive census of South Sudanese communities has not been counted, and nobody have any clue of an accurate representation of the populations of each State and County. Nobody know how many people have been displaced from their original homes and how many have migrated to different locations. One do not think Salva has any idea of how many people can be counted for and qualify to be given a State. He also should have first studied the cultural context of interaction between each ethnic group in the country and see if dividing people base on their ethnicity could actually help the country stability.
In some extend, the division will increase hatred among various ethnic groups. Ethnic conflicts are regularly started by many things including distribution of resources where each group can be determined by their ethnicity, especially who gets what and how much is being determine by one ethnic group. In a collection study conducted by some scholars on ethnicity and boundary maintenance, (Vermeuelm amd Govers; 1994) indicate that ethnic group and boundary maintenance is problematic. In a recent work, Gescjoere and Nyamnjoh (2001) emphasis a notion of autochthony, where each ethnic group is capable of arousing strong emotions regarding the defense of home and their ancestral lands whenever an outsider had intruded. Therefore, ethnic division Salva Kiir is seeking carrying a political disorder.
The hostility will start with the land issues and later on resources at a local level. We need to create a fundamental inter-ethnic harmony mechanism that will help tackled the basic means that will unite us. It’s still fresh in our mind that current conflict began as a political power struggle coupled with implications on ethnic conflict exacerbated by the absence of a collective identity in the country. The government’s failure to develop an efficient system to distribute wealth and resources has exacerbated ethnic divides and this by far will be increased by this ethnic division.
Salva Kiir government does not feel threatened, he is willing to ignore popular protest and foreign criticism toward such stolen vision. He is standing firm to really impose these artificial States no matter what. Those who criticize him on the issue of 28/32 States are his enemy.
Though one is not a Jews prophet, many people particularly those whose land is being annexed will hardly surrender to Salva Kiir and his backers’ land grabbing motto. They will always resist and face confrontation with people who had taken their land.
Oftentimes, imposition of a system on a regional or territory base has never been successful because people can always resist the notion. Therefore, establishment ignited by the few individuals without the consent of the people remain the decision of the few and it’s lack effectiveness due to the fact that it carry poor institutional structures especially when interest of all people had not been harmonized. The generally acceptable norms is that ethnic composition of a country increases the likelihood of conflicts, than States with mix-ethnic groups that are living under the guidance of supreme law of the land. This means heterogeneous State usually base its policies on political parties structure, that makes it easier for most of the country citizens to get access to power given that individuals are chosen because of their potentiality rather than their background or ethnicity.
Beside the issue of the number of States and their boundaries, the lack of facilitating cantonment sites could reignite skirmishes. Like it was in 2015 compromise peace agreement, cantonment process for the R-ARCSS has been a slow movement. When the peace was signed on September 12, 2018, it has been stipulated cantonment should be completed, within one month, 2018 and 2019 had gone and today is 2020. Although some of the army have been cantoned, the rest remain lugging in the government control areas.
In summing, as South Sudanese leaders are deliberating to determine the future of R-ARCSS, Individuals are yet casting doubt salva Kiir must not reverse 28/32 States decree. The imposition of 28/32 States is a dangerous move that will cause third round of violence in South Sudan in the near future. Although the stakes are high in terms of peace implementation, yet, issue of imposing uncompromised States will easily leads to conflict and this conflict will lead to disintegration of South Sudan regions. So, in order to create more States in the country, let all parties in the country seat and determine the number of the States. However, States aren’t going to be created on ethnic lines. This will keep us divided for couple more decades before we should embrace one another. What we need in South Sudan is not ethnic division, what we need is federal system where each region or territory will have an autonomy within a whole structured federation. If many countries around the world that are made up of tribal segmentation could learn how to live together as brothers and sisters, why can’t we learn how to live together?
The author is an analyst and political commentator: he should be reached atlulgatluak09@gmail.com,lgatluak01@hamline.edu andlulgatkuoth@gmail.com
The opinions and press releases expressed in this commentary are solely those of the authors, any veracity lies solely on the authors or the institutions represented by the authors. View more opinion articles and press releases on SSNN. To get your article published, visit our contact page here or send your email to info.ssnewsnow@gmail.com
Facebook Comments