By Luka Rick,
June 20, 2015(Nyamilepedia) — South Sudan is still fighting a land war and it’s the country’s great divide in Africa, it’s divided by tribal concept and their cultural line up between tribes, there are many different views about the historical and current role of Southern Sudanese people in the national landscape. And ruling party whom are created and plan war in newly country, this point of view fluctuates to the people an innocent woman and children. The history was successes that Jinubeen people have achieved recently and previously war easily embrace peace and freedom for long running escalated fundamentally war cause by one enemy, but at the end Jinubeen all rejoice freedom for independent the country, for we are young and free is the catch cry when everyone celebrates our progress that is emerge at last. We can enjoy the feeling of a carefree happiness. It brings a united pride to the fore.
The diversity of Jinubeen people is an achievement we could all be proud of 64 tribes are living in parodies ever, land of milk and honey, from our beautiful traditional culture ways to the 21 century to the modern we now boast doctors and lawyers, nurses and teachers, builders and designers, and we got more actors, authors, musicians of Africa standards. We can even celebrate for that achievement what God provided to the new nations. There are some tribes in South Sudan work to give back to our community by dictatorial manner. And we work to improve all aspects and democracy of life for our future children and grandchildren like any county in the world, and to improve security and development. And to promote a better understanding of our cultural values. We work endlessly to cross the divided county, but some element need division into three 3 countries, 1- Greater Upper Nile, 2- Greater Equatoria, 3- Greater Bhar El Ghazel, but culture is the key.
Of course there are some people in 64 tribes who are not community focused their aims to make money for their own rather development our country, as in any society. From my personal experience from top to bottom as Southerners, I can only calculate that this minority comprises those who have rejected culture values and their heart full of corruption and killing innocent people, their hand full of blood. This is as confusing for Jinubeen people as it is for mainstream never get any things since independent of country.
Was the scene of the sharpest disagreeing between so called Dinka and rival Nuer? For several years, by a leapfrog and catfish process of move and countermove among themselves to mobilized their tribes, some of them has been trained in North of Bhar El Ghazal cities and county to fight so called Nuer people, the Greater Upper Nile and counterpart Greater Equatoria are occupation zones of Bhar El Ghazal had gradually been solidifying into separate entities.
The victorious powers will divide South Sudan into four zones of occupation and later into two or three countries in future, because hate and tribalism reached into maximum or the federation should be applied to people of South Sudan to prevent revenge from others tribes.
The Divided Nation why we are?
With the last election people of southern Sudan are stood firm to get independent from colonial state Sudan I’ve been giving a great compact of thought to why are we so divided as one people one nation as regime so funny to called one nation rather divided nation according to SSTV propaganda matters to brain wash to non educated people and demolish the nation thru bullet, I know division has always been endemic in our country, in any states, really, but lately it seems that things are getting worse, many people are perfecting by UN in their country is a really good manner to be a refugee in your country
Do you suppose why that is?
In a previous column, I touched on an idea that may offer some insight, I believe we’re divided because each side wants the government to support its own interested or their agenda, rather than keeping the government within its constitutional limitations. Some colleagues are free of delivering false misleading the government with nonsense ideological, and corruption minded.
So when, what I wrote was?
What I wrote was, so when this current government was elected it promises come sown to politicians informing us that “my government solution is better than Khartoum government solution, but now never happen government killing his own citizens slightly than promises people to work very closely in peaceful mode, I’m not impressed, if we got rid of this unconstitutional government interference, most part of our country’s problem would solve themselves to remove the current president of this country, the trouble is by allowing free militants killing in the name of Dinka not all Dinka need that ideas has a minority groups or so called gangs of nations, to terrified their own citizens those people required corrections before disappearing so far, we’d have no one to blame but ourselves when things go wrong or fail. But when we accept big brother solution or IGAD, it means we can blame the other guy’s government. And that’s why this nation is so polarized, we no longer take personal blame, but I can blame Mr president Salva Kiir to fail us and his responsibility for his failures country, and instead spend all his time blaming DR Riek Machar the other guy’s government solution you know what I meant.
When we accept the blame for something we did wrong to the nations rather than trying to transfer the blame and the consequences onto someone else like Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, most of us will try to correct matters, what is the root cause of this war, is the Gelweng or others. If we had a child out of matrimony and were forced to live in poverty or live with our parents as a result, most of government wouldn’t have any more wedlock. If their business war failed they ran away seeking sanctuary shelter from America and Brittan, the next coming government we would try to figure out how to make it succeed next time not failure like this current regime, instead of asking for government support to artificially keep it afloat.
We are encouraging regime to be cancerous and invasive, rather than streamlined and inconspicuous, before this regime we are using to save us and thus ruin us, killing, and destruction and terrified people, brought to its ultimate conclusion as soon as we can, this means as far as the federal government is concerned to all of us, there would be no government rescue programs, no welfare and no entitlements, because those things were deliberately not in the constitution of South Sudan.
Whether or not these are realistic or even estimable goals is not the point of this article. The point is, we want South Sudan to make other people around the Africa do what we want, rather than limiting the regime to what it’s supposed to do killing, raping and migrated other.
We need to divide the country into three states, Upper Nile, Equatoria, Bhar El Ghazal, because mankind has a long tradition of wanting to make their own decisions rather than killing civilians at the local level instead of having some far off person make decisions for us, never happen and will not happen again.
The Division of SPLA JUBA and SPLA I.O is good for this country?
I never before have seen such political division in terms of political philosophy and what SPLA, and I.O is better for this country, many people in South Sudan dislike this regime for good that exists however I propose it is not beneficial us, I like the division because it outlines the stark difference it happen by killing one tribe rather than others, I said the differences and we are provided a more clear choice to the Kiir’s regime rather to give up or make peacefully solution, the reason why I bring out the word philosophy is because each party has their beliefs however often in practical terms their respective ideas aren’t implemented due to practical issues.
Is the current political climate good or bad for this country?
Yes, despite what some say such as the a house divided cannot stand, South Sudan divided into various divided factions struggling through legal canal is exactly how a so called democracy is supposed to work by killing tribes I don’t think not can work in that way, every tribe came to power will used his power to killed another tribes, the only problem I have is that South Sudan there are only two bigger tribes Nuer and Dinka, and others have been relegated to the side, only truly two tribes are making competitive at the government in state level and nations wide.
If we were all South Sudanese united in thought and philosophy today president Kiir couldn’t killed people, it can debate in peaceful manner rather than gun barrel, or forced to be united in though and attitude, we cannot follow groupthink and never debate seriously because this man from my tribe or that man from different tribe that is a failure govern, as well as pave the way for a single government not fighting and killing party system anyone that looks at background history of Anya Nya one and Anya Nya two can easily see how terrible that can be for killing minority rights and civil liberties.
On one hand we have the benefit of receiving multiple views on a single theme, allowing South Sudanese for a more thought out and properly solution to most problems which our government tackles. On the other hand we only ever receive the same two or three points of view and our politicians just end up bickering over who is right, Kiir, or Machar , or Lam, thus never tackling the issue with an appropriate answer to the nations wide, Kiir looking after Dinka tribe and Machar under Nuer pressure to take over the power to revenge massacre happen in Juba Dec 2013, and Akol tackling beside two buffalos to suck milk from them rather to take part of threshold, because mostly each side wants its own solution, not the correct one.
Furthermore, a three worried party system in South Sudan is doomed to this kind of failure. Ever notice how every single coming election in further notice I guess the history has devolved into squabbling battles over who is more stupid than the other guy? It’s especially terrible in the affect it has on our population half died some missing on this war, considering how most people choose one or more political party to side with and refuse to actually participate in good democracy rather than killing. Either efficient democracy are never ever efficient models.
Well, not so much efficient democracy are never ever efficient, it’s just the nature of this particular attitude, as they are capable of achieving a better understanding. Of course, this requires that each political party in South Sudan actually has its own point of view in this war. In Kenya they have two major parties but others are exactly the same but with every minor difference. So we would be an example of a failed tri-party government.
As for people who say SPLA Juba single party democracy is a bad idea, stop saying that, it really doesn’t help anyone when you are so quick to throw away an idea because am from other tribe not yours, you refuse to believe anything’s other than your preferred solution is a good solution. This mentality is hatred ideological, of course, goes to prove the flaw in political parties having too similar ideologies, if SPLA Juba and SPLA I.O they both agree that, say, space exploration is pointless you will never ever see anyone attempt to kill people any more.
It is completely fine to divide a state of South Sudan into three republics as long as it is not being carried out for political or any other materialistic gains, if the state is not being governed by Salva Kiir and SPLA Juba properly because of an justified reason of it being too big then its bifurcation does not pose any threats for the democracy. For instance after state bifurcation the new states Upper Nile, Equatoria, and Bhar El Ghazal.
In South Sudan as per the fundamental principle of diversity, the different regions and linguistic groups can protect civilians and conserve their own culture. Is good we had decided to live a united social life without fear or intimidations or losing the distinctiveness of the numerous cultures that constituted South Sudan. South Sudanese nationalism has sought to balance rather one tribe take over by themselves and the principles of unity and diversity is very vital to regenerate our bad mentality of dictator minded without knowledge and will not take him nowhere. The nation does not mean negation of a region, is very important to have and linguistic groups in South Sudan than Dinka minority language can protect and conserve our own culture among people of South Sudan. Before we have decided to live a united social life without losing the distinctiveness of the numerous cultures that constituted in South Sudan. South Sudanese nationalism has sought to balance the principles of unity and diversity. The nation does not mean negation of a region. In sense the South Sudan approach was different from that adopted in some Africans countries where they saw cultural diversity as a threat to the nation.
Therefore, Democracy of South Sudan allows the political expression of regional aspirations and does not look upon them as anti national or anti democracy accept SPLM Juba. Besides, democracy politics allows parties and other groups to represent the people on the basis of their regional identity, aspirations and specific regional problems thus in course of so called democracy politics, regional aspiration get strengthened than killing, at the same time, democratic politics we needed also means that regional issues not Greater Upper Nile problems will receive adequate attention and accommodation in the policy making process.
Also I suggest if the states are formed on the basis of old regional languages and federal which makes it easier to operate by governing point of view. And am sure, there were and are some tensions agitations due to the poor govern and lack of vision due to regional disputes from Kiir’s leadership, but it won’t overshadow national unity much better than dictatorship split the county unto three states in future.
Why dictatorships are always bad?
Dictatorship is good is far way bad in term of govern ruling is that there’s no accountability like what president Kiir Mayardit did right now, money stolen from his office, millions of dollars lost every day basis, one man controls a whole country. He decides how the government is run by himself. He decides how the courts will decide cases. He decides the country’s immigration and emigration policies. He decides how people in South Sudan will live their lives. He decides when, where, and how every company will do business under him and got their report daily basis. He decides whether people who disagree with him will live or die. In extreme case, Mr Kiir Mayardit a dictator will always satisfy his own sexual urges with other women in his cabinet some of them are ministries and some church’s choirs.
The most dictators probably did not start as inherently evil people, but the more power one obtains the more corrupt and evil one gets in order to retain that power. This is true for dictators Salva Kiir’s who resort to fear, violence and intimidation his own people to keep himself in power despite poor leadership without vision, are some dictators name in the world including Salva Kiir Mayardit no 25.
- Saddam Hussein was a well known leader that instigated numerous conflicts in his lifetime. He instituted mass genocide against the Kurds, Shabaks, Assyrians, Mandeans and other ethnic groups who rebelled against his leadership and fought several wars against Iran and Kuwait, with the death toll climbing to about 5 million in total.
- As president of Sudan, Omar Al Bashir was the ruler that negotiated the end of the Sudanese civil war by giving in to what the Sudan people’s libration army was requesting. Although what he did was considered fair and noble, the agreement directly led to wars in Darfure and Blue Nile, Nuba Mountain that claimed the lives of about 1 million people due to violence and starvation. More dictatorships name are coming.
What type of federalism in South Sudan today?
When the government of South Sudan was first established in the constitution it was deemed to be run under a system of federalism. Federalism, a term that sprouted from the federalists, is the idea that the governmental sovereignty is divided between the central governing national authority, and another political unite, such as states.
There are many different types of federalism including dual federalism, cooperative federalism, creative federalism, fiscal federalism, and new federalism, among others. There three main types of federalism are.
- Dual Federalism: is the idea that the union and the state share power but the federal government holds more than the individual states. This is USA work that system.
- Cooperative Federalism: is the idea that the federal government and the state government share power equally. It has never been attempted but it seems unlikely that it would works as the state governments and the federal government.
- Fiscal Federalism: is the type of Federalism in which the money bag controls everything’s.
- Creative Federalism: is common in the USA even now.
- New Federalism: was created in response to the power the state governments
Contact: Email: email@example.com | http://www.nueronline.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 firstname.lastname@example.org