Justifying the Fallacy of Bashing Both Sides in South Sudan Conflicts: A Response to Stephen Par Kuol’s Article

By James Okuk (PhD), Juba

Courtesy of

Courtesy of Stano…

March 24, 2015(Nyamilepedia) — As long as both the SPLM-IO and the GRSS continue to use violence means for securing their political interests, facts and fictions will always get mixed to produce propaganda fallacies in attempts to justify one’s evil actions. The article of Stephen Par Kuol is not absolved from such one-sided bias. It is his right to be biased for the interest of the SPLM/A-IO, but he doesn’t have a right to force it on our throats without a response.

Mr. Stephen has already damaged his credibility when he lied that he was an eye witness of ‘genocide’ in Juba while he lived in comfort in New Sudan Palace Hotel and was driven on a standard car to Juba Airport for flight check-in to Nairobi as the city was under threat of rebel attacks. Even myself who lived in 107, dodged some bullets to escape death narrowly on 16 December 2013, swallowed the bitterness of my house being attacked and looted badly with damages, and communicated with some of my neighbors who managed to reach UNMISS camp alive, cannot  temper with my credibility to lie with a conclusion that ‘genocide’ took place in Juba.

Yes, some targeted killings took place but not ‘genocide’ as the SPLM-IO propaganda machine used to lie to the international community. Also not all those who were killed in Juba during the outburst of the crisis hailed from one ethnic group. Other ethnic groups were affected too, including some foreigners. If 20,000 members of one ethnic group were killed in Juba on 15, 16, 17 and 18 December 2013, then who would have been left among them in 107, Kor William, Gudele and Jebel to run for a dear life and take refuge in UNMISS camps? Even those who took refuge in UNMISS camps were not all from one ethnic group. That was why you could see signposts in UNMISS camps pointing to one ethnic group on one side and other ethnic groups on the other side.

Armed Forces Status Issue: The amalgamation proposal is a recipe for another future eruption of senseless violence. The case of the CPA’s model of the Joint and Integrated Units (JIUs) is still fresh in our memories where the two armed forces clashed thrice in Malakal, for example. Thus, neither integration nor amalgamation of the armed forces of the two warring parties will work as long as there is no trust and good faith between them. Also the proposal pf proportional representation of the 64 tribes in the national armed forces will not set a good precedent for a one nation-building because it will, instead, entrench tribalism as criteria for tackling national issues of South Sudan. Hence, it could be safer if the 1972 Addis Ababa Agreement model is adopted for tacking the issue of armed forces of the warring parties. Thank God that veteran Gen. Joseph Lagu is still alive and kicking for consultancy on this matter.

Public Disclosure of Debts: If the SPLM/A-IO has already gave a verdict that the debts of President Kiir’s Government is illegal then why should it be disclosed at will? Why should Dr. Riek’s Resistance Movement negotiate with a kleptocrat and an illegal president if at all there is honesty in what the SPLM/A-IO posits? They should they not stick to overthrowing him via violence means if they thought it was an easy matter to usurp power that way? But is the SPLM/A-IO legal itself to demand for legality of another? It should be the citizens who have not taken arms against the state to demand such disclosers of government debts; not outlaws rebels. Also the law-abiding citizens of South Sudan will not bother themselves asking for disclosure of debts of rebellions because rebels are never accountable to the citizens; only the legitimate government.

The Coup or No-Coup Narratives: This has not been falsified yet because no court verdict has taken place so far. The case has been stayed only until further notice. But how do you call shootings in an army barrack which make politicians escape from their homes and declare rebellion resistance movement against the government within a very short period? If it is running for dear lives why not run to non-violence asylum in another country rather than to violence rebellion in the bushes? Remember that a victim cannot resist, hence, no rebel can be regarded as a victim in the current crisis of SPLM failed leadership in South Sudan. That is why the Intra-SPLM Arusha Reunification Agreement forced all the so-called SPLM leaders to apologize to the people of South Sudan and be ready to answer any proven war crimes against humanity. Victims don’t apologize.

Peace Talks in Bad Faith: In Pagak consultative conference, the SPLA-IO generals told Taban Deng Gai to carry on with peace negotiations in Addis but they will continue to conduct the violent approach on the ground with Paul Malong until President Kiir is gone for good. Where the good faith to demonstrate from the SPLM-A-IO even if the GRSS failed to bring peace out from around the corner of Makuei Lueth? Hence, comes double standards of contradiction of mixture of both dialogue and violence at the same time but with the result of collapse of negotiations and continuation of warfare. This makes the region and the world skeptical about seriousness of the warring leaders of South Sudan in bringing good news to their people. Thus, an agreement could possibly be forced on their throats by before July 2015 as their hands are held on pens to sign it unwillingly with international guarantees for its implementation.

Diplomacy is an anti-thesis to Militancy: Diplomatic language is a language of nice and flattering expressions in order to cool the environment for tackling hot issues and gain something out of the deal at the end of the day. The diplomacy of blaming and condemning both the warring sides is a correct one as long as the SPLM/A-IO and GRSS senseless war continues. This language may only change if the principals agree or are forced to end the war by any means. So, it would be better for Stephen Par Kuol to keep his appeal to the regional and international community to himself because they are doing what diplomacy is supposed to do when there is no will for peace from the warmongers.

Dr. James Okuk is lecturer and public analyst in the area of politics. He lives in Juba and can be reached at okukjimy@hotmail.com

Advertisements

  7 comments for “Justifying the Fallacy of Bashing Both Sides in South Sudan Conflicts: A Response to Stephen Par Kuol’s Article

  1. March 24, 2015 at 12:25 pm

    I wonder how this Dr. Okuk conflicts itself with Dr. Okuk of last week Article where he casted blame on government for cause of this political turmoils. It doesn’t matter how Dr. Okuk with of this article become a miiror-image of another Dr. Okuk we have been reading his reasonable artilces. My question to this Dr. Okuk is that did you count the bodies of people killed in 107, Gudele and other areas on December 16, 2013 before you escaped for your dear life? I would like to read more about your knowledge of what had happened in Juba. Otherwise, we your readers are not convinced about your presenting facts in response to Stephen Par’s article.

    Like

  2. March 24, 2015 at 12:30 pm

    I wonder how this Dr. Okuk conflicts himself with Dr. Okuk of last week whose Article casted more blames on government as the cause for the ongoing political turmoils. It doesn’t matter how Dr. Okuk with this article becomes a miiror-image of another Dr. Okuk we have been reading his reasonable artilces a few weeks back. My question to this Dr. Okuk is that did you count the bodies of people killed in 107, Gudele and other areas on December 16, 2013 before you escaped for your dear life? I would like to read more about your knowledge of what had happened in Juba. Otherwise, we your readers are not convinced about your presenting facts in response to Stephen Par’s article.

    Like

    • March 24, 2015 at 3:05 pm

      With all respect,i think both are HALF-CASTES,but they still discriminated themselves.

      Like

  3. Moses Gatkuoth
    March 24, 2015 at 10:17 pm

    What Dr.Okuk loss in the senseless war he is calling ? His worries has a coverup or he is to do away with the killing of one ethnic , he is right to denied because his problem is the nation to work in and enjoy lives .he forget nation is land, people, wealth and system to govern the all.

    Like

  4. March 24, 2015 at 11:48 pm

    Dr.Okuk or what ever you call yourselves, if you admitted that people were killed but your problem was number then a genocide destination is not talking of huge number killed but when ever you intend to kill one tribe though you kill only 20 persons it is already a genocide. If you still did not convince why you put it on your article that UNMISS was divided into one tribe to this entrance and the other tribe to that entrance? This is a indication that genocide did took place. more than 200 people were killed in Gudele simply because they were Nuer. My three brothers were killed on their way to UNMISS Tongpiny at SDA round about simply because because they are Nuer. one is university student, second was just a junior student and the third one was age of 14 in Primary.

    Like

  5. Riaw Gatlier
    March 25, 2015 at 12:11 am

    Okuk’s rambling justification and response to Cde. Stephen Par Kuol’s article is either a Beer driven or a monetary driving belt. His denials of Nuers’ genocide in juba, disputing of separate armies proposal, objection of declaration of debts under dysfuct regime in juba, his new proposal on how the security arrangements can be done as of that of 1972, Addis Ababa agreement between Joseph Lago and President of old Sudan Mohamed Jaffer Nimeiry, are totally tantamount to somebody who has not acquired a (PhD) doctorate but a somebody whose knowledge is
    being compromise during the learning process and a (PhD) which was just bought from either Uganda or Kenya like that was given to salva kiir last time. Imagine how can the Addis 1972, agreement be the best option to solve the current conflict in South Sudan while it didn’t solve the old Sudan conflict, ask Lago and salva himself. Mr. Okuk don’t try to brainwashed S.S. citizens they know who does what, who has the ability to change and reforms the unworkable system of the day in the younger nation, they know who mascared Nuers and how many of them were really executed in that very days of 16-31 Dec/2013, you know one day one time you will reiterate being a condoner of their killing in juba streets like dogs, it was because of authority in the hands of killers, it would have not, cannot and will never happen/ed under the sun that one of the tribes of S.S. can just get up as a mighty one to genocide Nuers never, even dinka plus Equatorians will never attempt this unbecoming and uncalled for acts. These are the braveries men and women in our young nation, democrats, principly very strong, trustworthies and second largest tribe by the then old Sudan’s censuses. If your brain is marry with the progandas of Makuei lueth; being confused plz try to rethink of the war in the battle field. Of course winning of one batle is not the end of the war. Very soon or later if war is the only option.

    Like

Post a comment or reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: