A letter from Warrap State, South Sudan – Riak Machar’s Apology For
Peace – By Naomi Pendle

September 22, 2011
9tweetsretweet
3Share

Riak Machar - Vice President of South Sudan

At this time of year, tall, green grasses conceal the shallow swamp
that stretches out on the far west side of the village of Pinydit
leading to the bend in the River Jur as it swerves to avoid Gogrial
Town.  These marshes are the surface-level, communal grave of many
teenagers who died in the 2008 violence between the communities of
Gogrial East and Gogrial West Counties.  Their bodies were never
collected nor buried in their families’ homes.  The collection of the
dead would have encouraged the losses to be counted, and retribution
and compensation to be sought.

At the end of four years of escalating violence, in which tens of
thousands were displaced and thousands killed, the traditional leaders
of Gogrial East and Gogrial West agreed to forfeit any claims of truth
telling, retribution and compensation.  This was at the request of
President Salva Kiir.  A court case the year before had demonstrated
the complexities of truth telling and apportioning responsibility
after widespread conflict, also highlighting potential complications
in the logistics of the delivery of any compensation.  The severity of
the fighting in the last months had only further deepened the
inability to achieve a truth account by consensus.  Therefore, with a
shared desire for an end to hostilities and a return to peace, the
leaders agreed on impunity for all who were culpable for the violence.

The amnesty and effective impunity offered by President Salva Kiir on
the 9th July for actions during the North-South war also may reflect a
recognition of the complexities of truth-telling and compensation, as
well as a desire for peace at the present time.  With more Southerners
dying in South-South violence than North-South violence in the two
decades of the SPLA led war, there is necessarily much intricacy in
any sufficient account.  This reduces the possibility a of mutually
accepted account, and of apportionment of responsibility and loss.

Vice President Riak Machar apparently took this opportunity to admit
culpability for the Bor massacre in exchange for this impunity offered
by the President.  The ‘Bor massacre’ refers to a period in the early
1990s, after the split of the SPLA, during which significant
atrocities occurred between the Dinka Bor, and Nuer communities with
their leadership from the Nasir-based faction of the SPLA.  This
Nasir-based faction was, at the time, led by Riak Machar.  While
Machar denied any intention or instruction for the violence against
civilians in the Bor massacre, as a leader at the time, Machar
confessed that this leadership necessitated his culpability.

However, while the chiefs of Greater Gogrial in 2008 accepted the need
for impunity, it is unclear if Machar’s apology will satisfy the Dinka
Bor community’s perception of justice.  This is especially as the
children who survived this massacre are now a visible presence amongst
the vocal, educated young adults of South Sudan.  Plus, it is unclear,
even if the apology was not fully accepted as just, whether it would
be accepted in exchange for short-term or long-term peace and
cooperation.

Yet, Machar’s apology may be better perceived as perceptive politics
than prioritizing peace building.  Simultaneous to Machar’s apology
were Kiir’s contemplations over the appointment of his new,
post-independence cabinet.  With only Kiir and Machar’s positions
promised as secure, there was much anxiety and competition for the
remaining positions.  Machar’s timely apology could be seen as
coinciding with the Dinka Bor community’s growing anxiety about a lack
of representation in the government, and their increasing lack  of
unconditional loyalty to Kiir and the Dinka Rek community he is
perceived to represent.

Beneath the shade of an ageing tree, a few paces from a rare brick
building in the village, the young Dinka Rek man shuffles on his
broken, blue plastic chair.  Studies and work had taken him away for
months, but he still looked at ease back in his brother’s small brick
home in the village.  He is full of news of the Independence Day in
Juba and the long awaited government appointments.  Just the day
before, after weeks of apprehension, his uncle had been reappointed to
one of the most senior positions in the government of the Republic of
South Sudan.  “At least now I know everything will be alright”, he
said with an easy confidence.

The male youth of the Dinka trace their personal history, and episodes
of success and failure, in line with the triumphs of their uncles.
When their uncles succeed, especially uncles on their maternal side,
they expect to share the benefits of opportunity and provision.  When
their uncles falter or die, the nephews state this as the cause of
their struggles.  When the uncles fail to give them good jobs,
educational opportunities or financial benefits, their complaints are
widespread.  With such strong responsibilities, there is a sense of
obligation in ensuring that the family and wider community benefit
from one’s success.  The heads of families and traditional leaders
carried the burden of providing for their people.  The leaders in the
modern government are perceived to have the same duty.  Therefore, in
the construction of the national cabinet, the attention of the
observers was on which communities would gain representation.  They
assumed that a member of their own community in government would
enhance their personnel benefits.

Since the 1980s, the Dinka have often been conceived as one monolithic
community.  Therefore, the Dinka Bor community could be represented in
the political arena by a particular member of the Dinka Rek community.
 However, the geographic separation of their homelands, as well as
their history, fails to testify to a consistent homogeneity.  Their
current unity seems best traced to the common enemies during the
North-South war.  During the 1980s, most Dinka were united in their
battle against the regime in Khartoum and, in the 1990s, the Nuer
communities and Nasir SPLA were a common adversary.  However, with the
absorption of the Nasir SPLA back into the main SPLA, and with the
ending of the North-South war, there seems no necessity in the
contemporary unity among the Dinka in politics and the military.
Recent dominance of the leaders from the Dinka Rek communities
(including those of Warrap State) has suggested their lack of priority
to be inclusive of Dinka Bor.  Further, Dinka Bor resistance to this
dominance has shown their willingness for an ending of former
loyalties.

Machar’s timely apology opens the way for the possibility of support
for him from the Dinka Bor community.  This would create a united
power block between the communities of the old Greater Upper-Nile to
counter the power of Dinka communities of the former Greater Bahr
al-Ghazal.  While this still seems far from a political reality, it
was a union privately contemplated by senior leaders in the Dinka Bor
community prior to the 9th July that may not have been permanently
pacified by current distributions of power.  While public discussions
may centre around whether Machar’s apology is adequate for peace, the
key question may be whether it is adequate for a new political
climate.

Naomi Pendle teaches at the University of Bahr el-Ghazal (Wau) and
Marol Academy (Warrap State). She writes a regular Letter from Warrap
State for Making Sense of Sudan.
9tweetsretweet
3Share
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or
subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your
feed reader.
Posted in Making Sense of Sudan, Naomi Pendle, South Sudan. Bookmark.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JFD 
info" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/jfdinfo?hl=en.

Reply via email to