Thursday, December 22, 2011

When Giants Change Gears


When Giants Change Gears

It is undoubtedly factual as enunciated by history that the world is usually, as could be perceived somehow, in disguisable serene when there is one mighty superpower on the throne. But this is not often so if the situations do not align with the wishes of the empire. Otherwise the world headed by the United States today would not have wars going on in it.  Just like the empires that have long gone, the superpower has some responsibilities in what goes on, either normally or abnormally.

The biblical empires’ periods of calmness indicate that throughout history, man had become accustomed to the presence of one mighty power in order to remain disciplined and governable. It was evident in the following biblical empires:

1st world power = EGYPT (in power to 1491 BC) 


2nd world power=ASSYRIA (1491 - 606 BC) 


3rd world power=BABYLON (606 - 538 BC)
4th world power=Medo/Persia  (538 - 333 BC) 


5th world power=GREECE (333 - 44 BC) 


6th world power=ROME (44 BC - 476 AD)[1]

These biblical periods were weird in many respects just like their predecessors namely:

The British Empire in the grips of UK and then
The American Empire now headed by the USA.

These periods have been relatively unruffled due to the Mighty Power exercising its muscles when necessary to keep all and sundry under control, - hence world peace. Sheer miscalculations by the powerful can sometimes, as it had always been in history, put the world through periods of unrest and uncertainties. We all remember the WMDs, call them Weapons of Mass Destruction that were never found in Iraq. The unproven assumption by the United States and allies that Iraq was manufacturing weapons of mass destruction, a situation which led to invasion, was a miscalculation by the strongest. The resultant militancy by Al Qaeda and sectoral religious groups in Iraq was a reaction to an attack on their country which they knew was not justified. Many civilians have so far lost their lives in the wake of war in Iraq and in the continuing militancy there.

In today’s United State superiority, the game of the period had been played differently but much the same as in all other empires that have gone before it.  Though absolute force is not often used but used excessively when needed, the game has continued to be played based on submissions or alliances, political and economic control through dissemination and enforcement of democratic ideals and practices. No one can misjudge the weapon of economic control in which the mightiest and richest power  asks and coerces all countries to play by the rules of the game. Through the use of this powerful Market Nuke, weak third world will continue to be pushed down into the economic abyss.

On November 7, president Obama came to Australia and announced in the Australian parliament that ‘the United States is a pacific nation’ and authoritatively laced his speech with a forceful intonation of a highly regarded rhetoric; ‘we are here to stay.’

It was a tone that would nerve any emerging nation with intention to prosperity without checks. No question the Chinese were not happy. They might have seen this as the US policy of containment of China in the South East Asia. Remember ‘Chineseness’ drives the Chinese and the Chinese controlled economies of most countries in the region play the game of economic cultural attachment to the mainland China. Some countries such as Singapore and Indonesia have Chinese with motherland attachments who are economically strong and control 90 percent of national economies. So what is America saying here? The East will always be yellow and this should be clear to any power at the helm.

Chinese reaction to American geographic assertion into the Pacific region was to denounce Washington-Canberra’s re-alliance in military cooperation closer to home, for this was the reason behind the rhetoric. Many nations, America included,  might see Chinese uncontrollable advance in economic progress as the reason why US is literally disconcerted. America could be right. Chinese developmental advance in the past decades had been marvellous. The speed at which they overtook Japan and became the second most powerful economy in the world still mesmerises the Western world. 


The worry, however, is the evidence we have in history when two or more strong powers engage in sort of national or multinational interests. For instance when America, USSR and China swirled in a military confrontation over Korea in 1950s, it resulted in the fragmentation of the Korean society and led to an eventual division of the country into two separate nations - with one country going wildly nuclear. Millions of relatives were stranded on either side of the border and the two countries, thereafter, became sworn enemies for eternity. Could the same situation be repeated in this disguised war of economic control? If the tactics applied in this economic supremacy become so serious leading to proxy skirmishes, as it is evident in the case of China and the US, the probability is zero that least strong and friendly countries gawping on both sides may end up caught in the mix of war and muscular exhibition.

Who should then worry if this scuffle ensue? South Sudan will be among those who should need to worry. In the same week that America made her intention in the pacific, China declared it was boosting military ties with Khartoum. Sudan accepts one China policy, which threatens war if Taiwan declares independence and also denounces Tibetan fiddling around with demands of more autonomy in China than they have now. China is a major trading partner of Sudan purchasing at least one fifth of its industrial oil through and from Sudan. It also fears American eye of providence in South Sudan where most of the oil wells it depends on are situated and owned. China sees America in South Sudan as a potential threat to her source of oil. 


Had Sudan put one Sudan policy on the table of friendship with China? No one knows. But it would be clear Sudan needs Chinese support to control South Sudanese oil.

The assurance Sudan got from China in establishing military ties was the reason that led to  Khartoum stepping up its military incursions in Blue Nile, Nuba Mountains, South Sudan and Southern Khordufan. It was a conspicuous demonstration that Sudan's actions were consequences of guaranteed support and backing of the giant: China. Sudan further exploited this opportunity and commenced forceful nipping of South Sudanese oil for payment in kind. Who was going to buy that oil? It would be an awe for all to see the justifiable conditions under which South Sudanese national commodity would be traded without the consensual approval of the owner.

The truth is that Khartoum will not shut down South Sudanese oil flow, for China, the big partner would not like it. South Sudan can’t shut down the oil flow either for the wrath of the biggest buyer, which in this case is China, would be hard to bear. But the latter has the sole decision over her resources and would surprise the world in the scenario in which its national pride and independence appear to be at stake.

China and Russia have always been agitated where America appears to have interest. American interests in South Sudan, though not so significant, may cause the young nation some snags. With Chinese in the north and American influence in the South, the situation is symptomatic to Afghanistan in 1979 where Afghans suffered under the feet of Americans and Soviets; Vietnam in 1955 where Vietnamese became the undergrowth between Soviets and Americans and Korea; a country that was split up willy-nilly and China and America saw eye to eye and nose to nose with the Koreans paying the price. Today the world may risk paying the ultimate price because one of the Koreas has Nukes!! These guns are awful. Whose making is it? Perhaps the empire can answer that.

Will South Sudan suffer the same fate? We pray not. But we must be careful.









[1] The Chronology of World Empires, http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/endlesson4.html


Thursday, November 17, 2011

Pipeline: A Chord of Neo-colonization


By Martin Garang Aher

If you were tuned to the world media in the recent weeks, Sudan came up top on international criticisms over attacks on South Sudan, not certainly verbally but apparently militarily.  In this same week, bloodletting of the Arab Spring has neither certainly abated but increased in Syria and Yemen nor did the everlasting hostility stop the Palestinians Freedom Riders from boarding the Jewish settlers’ bus in demands of their freedom. Unlike Sudan and South Sudan, several chords bond residents of the Holy Land with hostility that runs deep that only the Divine can unravel

For Sudan and Bashir the bonds that hold Sudan can be held together through coercion even though their everlasting firmness cannot be guaranteed. The demands of the Sudanese in Darfur, Kordufan and the Blue Nile seem nothing but a teleological Sudanese syndrome that could only by redeemed through more brutality. And this meant holding on to people that the chord of unity does not support; by all means even if it means war with them.

Recent threats against South Sudan and possible cross border attack are indications that the chord binding South Sudan and Sudan is still held at heart by Khartoum besides the fact that the physical chord may be nonexistence or in the process of breaking. As usual, in the words of Abel Alier, all mess begins with dishonoring of agreements. CPA abrogation in the case of Abyei and trashing of Popular Consultations hope for the people of South Kordufan and the Blue Nile regions commenced Khartoum’s blasphemous killing spree. Memories of the past war chanting were in the air again.

And as usual, the Western World wasn’t moved. They always come in when somebody mentions ‘genocide possibility.’ And this usually gives Antonov pilots and tank drivers of a bloodthirsty regime an upper hand to sonorously chant Jihadists’ hymns as they march on to their famous killing fields in the South.

It always begins with scornful language as an antecedent followed by ruthlessness and cruelty. As evidently witnessed even by the United Nations, the language employed by President Al Bashir and his military commanders was full of militaristic sarcasm. They were the preceding pretexts followed by displacement of civilians in Kurmuk and aerial bombardment of refugees deep inside South Sudan territory. Sudan-backed rebel attacks on South Sudan heralded this planned disruption of life in South Sudan.

Khartoum, in such actions, was invitingly luring South Sudan into a confrontation and waylaying her for a military showdown. And as Susan Rice from United Nations warned ‘South Sudan not to take the bait and respond in kind,’ it was already evident Sudan has offered South Sudan the war bait. Sudanese military fighter jets’ bombing of refugee camps and South Sudan rebels armed to the teeth by Khartoum wrecking havoc on civilians in South Sudan were undoubtedly many types of bait too luscious to ignore. But as one would wonder, what is the underlying reason for this show of aggression by Sudan and what will she achieve in a military confrontation with South Sudan?

It is all bitterness and one chord that still lingers between the two-the oil pipeline.

Recent events in the Sudan are categorically and presumably the consequences of the failure of the New Sudan agenda and clear signs of the eventual implosion of the republic of the Sudan in the swirling heat of dissatisfaction under the imposition of one fragment of a country’s civilization identity on the rest.  However evasive authorities in Khartoum are playing the game differently, the truth will always haunt them. The reality is that no matter how juggernaut Khartoum’s military power and prowess might be, suppressing the will of the neglected masses through violence and vanquish will never ever bring her peace.  There is no way a government can be victorious over citizens that keep it in power. If at all there ought to be victory between the people and their government, it is always the people that emerge victorious, not the government. The government, as seen across many of the world’s nations, is a creation of the people.

Sudan is yet to come to terms with the reality that South Sudan is an independent country and a member of the United Nations, just like Sudan, operating on equal terms and privileges that a sovereign nation would do. The name South Sudan chose for herself during independence must not dupe Khartoum for a possible forceful reunification of the two countries in any time in the future, not even militarily. The chord that bound them together had been broken for eternity.

So, why threatened and attacked South Sudan?

This may not be a threat per se but a clear sign of the start of what Khartoum had always threatened the South With-disruption of oil supply and blockading the region for eventual suffering. Surreptitious support of the rebels against South Sudan is something already palpable and widely confirmed by studies. Small Arms Survey group had confirmed that a copy of AK-47, Type 56-1 used by the rebels against South Sudan is a Chinese cloned and supplied by Khartoum. The attack on Kuek that killed 13 South Sudanese was a clear whistle of war though not answered on equal terms by Juba. International media in the region witnessed it. Lambasting and vilification of South Sudanese by Bashir himself as ‘not conquerors of the country they live in now’ was also a well-intended provocation to lure the new nation into violent confrontation in order to achieve the ultimate objective. The disparagement seem to suggest, ‘if you think you were conquerors then come out now and try it with us.’

Pipeline is off! Will such announcement appease Khartoum? Yes, certainly. The truth is that all operations will come to a stand still in the South Sudan.

And with the unsubstantiated reports in the media that South Sudanese leaders, starting with the president, have amassed and stashed the sum of approximately 400 million dollars in foreign accounts, there is little concern that a threat of stoppage of cash and oil flow as a result of foreign aggression means anything. The kids and their many mothers are assured, at least financially whether there is going to be an economic blackout in the country or not.

South Sudan needs to be aware that bitterness in Sudan will never subside as long as there is an oil pipeline chord still tying Sudan and South Sudan together. And above all, the realization by many Sudanese socio-political vanquished groups that the fruits of struggle can be reaped whenever you hold a long and vicious war as epitomized in South Sudan has added a new interplay into the game.

We must willingly dissociate with the old republic of Sudan. Any relations may not straighten up as many expect but will remain skewed. The chord, in the form of a pipeline will continue to be an instrument of harassment to South Sudanese economy and this may lead to frivolity of consumerism in the near future. Before Khartoum shuts down this chord of neocolonialism, let an alternative route for the oil be found. Relations with Sudan will never be good and if we don’t believe it, we are living in fantasy.

Martin Garang Aher is a South Sudanese living in Western Australia. He can be reached at garangaher@hotmail.com


Friday, October 28, 2011

South Sudan and the Arab Spring: The Minister on Willful Resource Grabbing


By Martin Garang Aher

Just as the popular axiom illustrates, ‘for whatever has a beginning there is an end.’ It is the end of the climax of the Libyan revolutionary struggle against the regime of Gadhafi. It is also the stall point in the sense that the people of Libya have achieved what they fought for in the wake of several months of uprising against Colonel Muammar Gadhafi, a leader loathed so much by the West and praised abundantly by the African Union and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. Chavez seems charmed by Gaddafi’s arrogance in keeping opposition at bay and hauling over the coals the Western condemnations against his regime. In any nous, they share dictatorial arrogance and bravery – blind bravery. 

The West hated Gaddafi for his eccentric and enigmatic support of Al Qaeda activities in the Arab world and most disturbingly, the bombing of the Pan American World Airline flight 103, known tragically as the Lockerbie Bombing over Scotland in the UK in 1988. Gadhafi had also made Europe lived with the awful experience of bitterness through internal meddling. This was evident in Libya arming the IRA in Northern Ireland.

The African Union on the other hand is a baby of Gaddafi. He was adored and almost nearly worshipped by its leadership so that he could keep the organisation sufficiently funded thereby eliminating scrupulous processes of soliciting aid from the Western World. This near total dependence on him made him hoped and believed he could one day become the president of Africa. This commitment was clear in Libya offering huge financial support to the defunct organisation that watches over the slaying of Darfur people in the hands of Sudan’s counter-insurgency unit - the Janjaweed. His personal attires festooned with maps of Africa are overt scenes of his deep admiration for the continent. He saw himself as a model and yearned to be recognised as its father- father of Africa. 

Realistically, many African leaders who rejected Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC) in its initial stages of the war appeared like parodies on Gadhafi’s highway to a very long reign in power. Others like Chadian president, Idris Derby, had their own motives in supporting him all the way through. But why is Libya, under the auspices of a well-crafted Green Book that led her to relative stability and strong economy in both Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa not satisfied with Gadhafi?

It is a question that will always linger around. In African political demagogue, leaders pledge many developmental and social reforms when seeking and biding for power; a stepping stone to be democratically elected into the office and after which a ruthless crack down on oppositions ensues. Constitutions eventually become menus that could be changed overnight to solidify grip on power. This is a politico-ideological disease that has swamped the Arab world and perhaps the Arab world too has infested Africa. 

One wonders if the Arab Spring, as the uprising throughout the Arab world is referred to, is not moulding other dictators to replace the incumbent ones whom they seek to overthrow through mass protests. In the Libyan case, armed insurrection was the fundamental tool because all other political persuasions to introduce democracy never moved Gadhafi. He viewed such attempts as cheap shenanigans. Question therefore remains as to whether the NTC will not stall and a hard won liberation handed over to other dictators in waiting, as is the case in Egypt. Libyans should be quizzical with the NTC leadership and these leaders too must show that they are immune from power hunger and demonstrate that they will not turn against the very civilians who look upon them for change as exhibited by Bashar in Syria.

It all starts with resources. The government of the people must use the country’s resources to the satisfaction of the populace. Irregularities and desire to amass country’s resources for one’s ethnic, religious sect and regional affiliations cannot redeem the country rather, they will jettison it into a free fall in the direction of  the abyss of corruption and other socio-political degeneracy.

It is in light of this question that one is forced to reflect on the situation in South Sudan. The wind of independence is abating and the country is beginning to be habituated by her erstwhile-displaced population trickling in from the Diaspora and from the Sudan.  The imperfective meditation that the two Sudans will remain a single entity or under a convoluted confederacy even after the breakaway of South Sudan is now an obvious past. Or was it an academic twist to the war possibly orchestrated by South Sudanese?  It needs time to be fully comprehensible. But one thing is clear, Sudan will always remain a foreign land.  Today South Sudanese citizens are looking up to the tutelage of their leaders to transform their homeland into a liveable community. But will this thought intercommunicate with the desire of the flamboyant leaders who see the national cake as something to grab for oneself and one’s own people?

A recently formed government of president Kiir has a minister who thinks that regional enrichment will answer the quest for development. All across South Sudan, states that felt happy for having been awarded sufficient ministerial positions went out in celebration and called for fancy thanksgiving parties, not to the president but to their elected ministers for having made it to the top. It started with Western Bahr El Ghazal, then Western Equatoria before the deprived state of Northern Bahr el Ghazal wiped out tears of disquietude and misrepresentation in the national government and held a party for their two sons who were appointed  ministers in the national government.

In all these parties, comments made by various leaders were supportive of presidential decision to appoint ministers within rank and files of their capable colleagues. Praises to the president were not considerate of calculated forthcoming elections manoeuvres in 2014. Others thought a cumbersome Dinkanisation of the national leadership had finally been broken.

Then came promises and tribal attitudes from the leaders. And none other than Alison Manani Magaya uttered the comments that jerked some patriots who might had illusions that a long time serving professional of that calibre had a key to proper and equitable development knowledge for the country. Manani urged a fellow minister in the foreign ministry who comes from W. Equatoria to fill the books of staff with West Equatorians. 'We are not asking you to put our people there but you must do it.' He elaborated more, 'we have to grab for ourselves too because others are doing it.' 

The comments, if put into action unreservedly as in the words of the pundit himself, would have long term results akin to the precursory grievances that led to the Arab Spring in the Middle East and North Africa. If it starts with grabbing for our regions, what will stop South Sudan from following in the footsteps of Libya? We are at the corner turning left onto the 'Arabian Highway.'


Sunday, July 10, 2011

Day of Contentment Replaced the Day of Devastation




Finally the day has come for South Sudanese, the African Continent and the world. A new nation is born, the people once marginalized have now spoken by bullets and ballots and the struggles to achieve an identity have been realized. For South Sudanese, the old slogans of Aluta continua and comradeship, which to many, the meaning and overtone are shadowy, must now continue in different forms - the forms of social-economic development, social cohesion, moral justice, and above all, nationalism and patriotism that can be translated into action for the well-being of citizens who have been devastated by  protracted wars. The challenges are still great and the wind of change is still blowing.

The next war is somehow unconquerable, but maneuverable: the war of development. It demands correct and astute application of democratic ideals. But with wisdom and good watchfulness and national pride, an impetus in the willpower to advance can be created and this new nation can meander around the giants to the top. It is a small world but there is a place for all that breathes.

So far South Sudanese have learnt in the first and second Sudanese civil wars, 1955 – 1972 and 1983 – 2005, that it is not wise to take a bull by its horns. But there are incidences that the only thing you can catch of the bull is only the horn. The impasses of a multifaceted development must be taken squarely on by the horn.
Ideally, on this day of independence, this is not the central theme. Expectations of South Sudanese seem to suggest that they know what lies ahead. I must advise here that economic development is a kind of war that a nation should prepare adequately for. The tides are rough, but manageable if correct and honest strategies are formulated, adhered to, and consistently applied.

The rest of Africa is waiting to haul South Sudan on to the truck of economic development, where the monsters with which several economies wind around, are the Economic Blocs of different kinds: The World Bank, The IMF, and other financiers. It is a figurative and calculative arena that requires a country to prepare its human resources or workforce very well for the competition. Education would be the key for success in such a whirlpool of interests, often marked by legal manipulations. We have a world where we must tread carefully and always lay a low profile. 

South Sudanese should now know that the path towards progress has many potholes of problems, with not a single panacea for these problems. It is where a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.
It is a world where no one helps you sign deals but baits you to. Many countries have signed agreements and with that they lost the trend and poverty became commonplace. And often times you get into eternal hereditary by your own signature. Wise and lucky ones become wealthy. In such countries, children are born with 'original debt' they can never pay in their lifetime. But there is little you can do to surpass the economic mightiness of those familiar with the game. Remember, man has already mass-produced the ultimate weapon. They have a name for it. Human feet have defiled the goddess for some of our communities, the Moon, already. The blue sky that forms the everlasting mosquito net over the South Sudan has some people living in it up there. 

My dear young nation of South Sudan, welcome to the world of perfidy, the world of national interest, the world of alliances, the world of masters. It is the world of agreements, treaties, memoranda of understanding, and so on. We can live there can't we? It is better in this world than it is in the land of Janjaweeds and Murahaleens. And if you are asking for the solution, then the solution I don't know. Just don't borrow where you can never repay. Own no masters or at least be a master. Develop your human resources or perhaps be a test case in a different scenario. South Sudan can benefit if it chooses to follow in the path of successful nations. 

The main focus for the people of South Sudan was to end marginalization and set themselves free. This had been a subject that often carried emotional charge. Today South Sudanese have a geographical confinement. The truth is that they have always been around. Even prophet Isaiah talked about them. The long desired Promised Land is now here. It is the milk that is yet to be seen.  We needed a home country, a cocoon to recline to when necessary.  It is now a full realization and an achievement worthy of attempt. It is a national identity that was lacking. South Sudanese have so long lived with the misnomer that they are part of the Arab world and therefore Middle Easterners. Arabs – black Arabs? The misnomer is great and yet no one seemed to give it a thought for at least half a century.

Now they have got a country they will forever hang on to till the end of time - The Republic of South Sudan where the word Sudan will really insinuate the ‘Land of the Black.’  With the creation of this new state comes the excitement and jubilation for millions of south Sudanese whom maladroit of war have made to assume the tunnel they were in had no exit where light would appear. Today it is shining at the tunnel’s end for the people of South Sudan. And into the tunnel goes no hope, desire or willingness for turning back. We are out and free.

In his speech, Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary General on July 9, 2011 in Juba said South Sudan has become the 193rd nation that will soon acquire membership in the United Nations. The African union welcomes the Africa’s 54th, sovereign state. The East Africans want them on their economic bloc for the next war. South Sudan is a country!

The Africans who have put up with the pressures of Sudanese refugees influx and have borne the brunt of malevolent of a lingering war in the Sudan have also expressed their joy and support for the new nation. At least a neighbor is at peace. South Sudan was a no go zone for the rest of business Africa and the world. It is time now for Africa and the world to come and see what Southerners have been fighting for in this land of Sudd and The Mighty Nile. South Sudanese are saying, ‘You are welcome!!’

 And what do South Sudanese think of the day?

The world that has stood with the people of South Sudan through humanitarian sustenance; the world in which generous countries like Australia, UK, America, New Zealand, Norway Canada, and others stretched their generosity further and offered millions of South Sudanese resettlement, deserves our appreciations. It is on this day that we acknowledge their generosity. We the South Sudanese thank them abundantly. We say unto them “Since you have been with us during our times of need, you are friends indeed and we say thank you.” The new president of the Republic of South Sudan never missed the point of thanking them overwhelmingly today, July 9, 2011 during his sworn in Juba when South Sudan legally declared her Independence.

It is today that many South Sudanese believe that the Arab (Jellaba) dominated ruling party in Khartoum, which signed the Comprehensive Peace Agreement with the Southerners in 2005, has acquiesced to sitting down and watching them raised their flag and singing a brand new South Sudan National Anthem. To South Sudanese, it was a dream comes true; it was the day of reckoning. They have wisely and courageously refused to be dragged back into war willy-nilly in the months leading up to the Independence Day, and vehemently avowed to secure their freedom, land and their future. Aspirations of the people of South Sudan have now been realized after a rough ride.

To the Arabs in the North, they saw it as a failure in the policy of Arabisation of Black Africa which had been broken by unpardonable resistance by southerners through insightful determination and en masse ejection of Islamic policies and beliefs. African stubbornness in demanding freedom through opposition of the Sudan’s Mahdism and Muhammedanism of the country had been portrayed throughout the 54 years of war. No South Sudanese ever admired it. Southerners have since demanded their rights while steadfastly inclined geopolitically to the free world where human dignity and freedom is prized above religious dogmatism.  

It is madness to see some people fighting wars in the name of God. God, from the all-powerful angle He has been displayed in most Holy books is truly capable of winning His own followers and does not need human succor and actors for the mission. In the name of whom do the weak humans fight for the powerful? The philosophy of religious affiliation must be psychological to a certain degree.

South Sudanese quest for a secular democratic system of government in Sudan had always been met with ululations and religious chanting that called for war in the name of God.  Really! But this is what we have been through. We have been through it long and hard that some boys and girls parted with parents at the tender age of ten and have ever since known nothing but themselves to rely on for the past two decades.

The breakup of Sudan does not make us happy, not in the least. We the Sudanese citizens both North and South have always wanted to be together. But something went horribly wrong in the political systems of the country. South Sudanese had no options left in their armory of togetherness in a united Sudan. Islamisation policy has destroyed the hopes of many. Southerners had to go and to go they went with everything that is South Sudanese above and beneath the ground. That includes the oil and other Divine endowed natural resources. And in the sky and heavens above, we have gone with part of our God that does not declare war on His people for submission.

The break up may leave North Sudan with a sense of fear that a country with more than five hundred ethnic groups, in which 63 tribes of South Sudan have already chosen secularism, will surely stand the test of hypothetic Arabisation in Africa and not more implosive disintegration. Many experts believe this. Erroneous and palpable of this anathematic Arabisation policy nominally stated that Sudan is an Arab Islamic State while ignoring the fact that a sizeable and above average population of the country is truly black. Additionally, this group of non-Arab neither knows nor understands anything of the policy of ‘Die or Believe.’ Sudan’s government’s call for Holy War or Jihad upon its own citizens as previously witnessed in Darfur through the use of Janjaweed as a force of counterinsurgency against the African Muslims, and more recently in Abyei will stand as a testimony for the world that needs to know the truth.

To South Sudanese, both at home and in the Diaspora, it is a freedom worth celebrating.  It is a break in posttraumatic stress that we often fear to speak about. It is a search light that exposes our confidence and assertiveness. It is a sudden sigh of relief for unpredictable questions that led to our displacement. It is a calming and sedative force for those whose hopes in the survival of their families have been dashed and replaced with pain that seemed to go on for eternity. 

Independence Day is a great day. This is the day that Southerners amputated, maimed and artificially deformed as a result of gun wounds, snake bites and animal attacks shed the tears of joy and pain, the day in which those whose bones remained scattered in the open and under the trees of Sudan and Africa for the course of their freedom will be remembered by the living, the day that those whose empty stomaches stopped them from breathing will be called to mind, the day that we recall our  bodies became deficient of fluids and people fell dried and dropped dead while the mighty Nile never runs dry, the day that the entire social structure of the people of South Sudan which had been devastated by war and its concomitants will certainly be given attention. This is the day that announces the end of a blatant devastation and heralding a new day-The Day of Contentment. The day is July 9, 2011.



Friday, January 7, 2011

Kura ya Maoni Kusini mwa Sudan

Ni masaa machache tu yamebakia tupige kura ya maoni itakayoleta uhuru kwa watu wa Kusini mwa Sudan. Twasema Kaskazini mwa sudan, "ubaki na ugoigoi wako." Sheria yenu iwe ugombezi wenu. Akilini mwetu kwa nusu ya karne hapa kusini, tuliona dunia ikiwayawaya nu kuyugayuga tukitafuta usaidizi wa kila aina ili tupate haki zetu. Mpira wakati huu uko kwa koti yenu.

Mwayowayo na mkipenda mlia machozi. Mola ni wa kila binadamu naye ni mwenye haki na upendo. Kwaherini. Na msisahau ya kwamba tutatengana na kufarakana nanyi milele kwa sababu tuliumia sana mikononi mwenu.

Katika vita vya kupigania uhuru, vita ambavyo wataalam wanaamini ni ndefu barani Afrika, tulikufa kwa risasi, wanyama wa msitu na wa pori walipata chemsha kinywa na miili wetu, wanawake wetu walinajisiwa, wengi wetu walichochewa na kufukuzwa nchini mpaka wakapata makao wa ghafula ughaibuni, tulichekeshwa tukiwa tunajaribu kutulia ugenini, watoto wetu wamezaliwa nje ya nchi hata hawajui Sudan ni upande gani wa dunia, kila kitu kimegeuka na kutugeukia vibaya hata akili zetu kwa sababu ya uhayawani wa wachache huku Sudan.

Lakini sasa, ijapo tulidhani Mungu hasikii, tunampatia shukrani, tunamwabudu na kumheshimu kwa kuwa mwishowe, anaonekana kama anasikia watu wake, duniani kote na hususan, watu wake Kusini mwa Sudan.