23 December 2008
Fellow South Sudanese,
On behalf of United South Sudan Party (USSP), it gives me pleasure to wish you a very Happy Christmas and a prosperous and peaceful New Year. This is the fourth Christmas of peace time after almost 22 years of brutal direct and indirect violence—violence that has claimed more than 2.5 million lives of our fellow citizens. These fallen brothers and sisters died in the name of the struggle for freedom, justice and opportunity for all.
Yet, four years into the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), most of our people have still not experienced peace or its dividend. Violence has continued to rule in some areas due to the availability of lawless armed groups that operate . . . (download PDF for more . . .)
The Party for INDEPENDENCE · FREEDOM · JUSTICE · EQUALITY for the citizens of South Sudan
Wednesday, 24 December 2008
Wednesday, 10 December 2008
BBC Interview 26-Nov-2008: USSP Leader Highlights Major Obstacles to Elections
BBC’s Network Africa held an interview with USSP’s Leader Clement Mbugoniwia in their London studios which was aired Wednesday morning, 26 November 2008. The demarcation of the North-South border and the release of census results featured as key elements for the success of the proposed elections in 2009. Asked if he was optimistic if elections would still take place, Mr Mbugoniwia highlighted a number of key issues to consider before the elections:
Listen to a clip of the interview 26-Nov-2008... © BBC Network Africa.
- Census. There's no specific population number for South Sudan. Khartoum claims that the South has 3 million people, whereas before the war the South’s population was 8 million. Malthus's Theory of Population even posits that any population happens to almost double every couple of decades or so, suggesting that South Sudan’s population should by now be ca. 16 million, even despite the ravages of war, given that human reproduction does not cease. The sheer inaccessibility of most areas of the South, coupled with the lack of facilities and logistics, has led to about 70% of the population not being counted.
- Insecurity is another major obstacle to conducting the elections. There is so much arms in the hands of lawless bandits such as the LRA and the Janjaweed, who masquerade in the guise of the so-called "Ambororo" frequently terrorising citizens, especially women and children, in areas such as Western Equatoria State.
- There are delays with regard to the formation of the Electoral Commission and the enactment of the Electoral Laws.
- Much of the South is inaccessible due to lack of proper roads. Mr Mbugoniwia cited an example where he spent five days to cover a distance of only 59 miles in Tambura County in Western Equatoria State.
(Photo: Mr Mbugoniwia in blue t-shirt with shovel)
Listen to a clip of the interview 26-Nov-2008... © BBC Network Africa.
Download USSP Leader's speech...
19 November 2008
Greetings and thank you all for your time and warm reception!
By way of introduction, my name is Clement Juma Mbugoniwia. I hail from Tambura County in Western Equatoria State. Like many South Sudanese, I am one of the victims of the last twenty two years of civil war that has claimed the lives of more than 3 million fellow citizens in South Sudan. As a result of the war, I took refuge in exile where I have continued with other fellow South Sudanese to play our part in the liberation struggle for the freedom of our nation. I am a lawyer by profession.
I wish to take this opportunity to thank every one of you here for having come to participate in this political rally on the eve of my first visit to Malakal. It is a pleasure for me to be here with you this evening. I am aware of the fact that the people of Greater Malakal are politically conscious. They rejected and resisted the invasion of foreign aggression more than a century ago in the form of the Nuer uprising for freedom, the Shilluk resistance and the role of the Mac which is equally acknowledged. Therefore, I am not here to propose anything new but to assert the importance and necessity of continuing with the struggle for an independent sovereign state as the only viable alternative to sustainable peace, prosperity and the maintenance of our national identity as a people. I am here to confirm that freedom requires sacrifice. The sacrifice that is demanded of us all is not greater or less than the sacrifice that millions of our fellow brothers and sisters have made throughout generations, sometimes with their own blood, land and resources, and I thank each one of those men and women for that.
United South Sudan Party was formed in 2005 out of the need to work for the vision of an independent South Sudan — a South Sudan that is based on true democratic principles, the rule of law and respect for human rights and civil liberties; a South Sudan where tribalism, nepotism and favouritism have no place; a South Sudan that provides opportunities for all regardless of their background; a South Sudan that does not tolerate corruption and the abuse of power; a South Sudan that is inclusive of its diversity; and a South Sudan where discrimination on the basis of tribe is made a criminal offence punishable by law.
As a party, we in USSP believe that the aspiration of the people of South Sudan for an independent homeland comes first before any other vision or policy. The fact that Sudan has been at war with itself for several decades justifies that Sudan has never been one nor will it afford to be one at any given time. Even the British who ruled Sudan before the 1956 independence acknowledged that South Sudan was a different nation and, thus, they introduced what was then known as the ‘Closed District Act’ to administer the South separately. Historically, the Sudan was not an Arab country, as claimed by the minority Arab rulers in Khartoum, but a land of the blacks who inhabited the Sudan. The fact that Sudan has now become referred to as an Arab country without the consent of the majority black Africans justifies the reasons for the protracted wars and the destruction. Now, whether we like it or not, we are technically Arabs as Sudan is officially an Arab country. Unless the South accepts the status quo as third class citizens, war will continue to haunt the people of South Sudan. It is a war that is imposed on the South because of its identity and land. In other words, the North is committed to its policy of Arabisation and Islamisation of Africa, and South Sudan is a gateway. It is for this reason that Khartoum has never honoured any agreement that seems to give the South some recognition as an entity, nor will it respect the CPA which even calls for making unity attractive.
Brothers and sisters, we have been at war even before the creation of “Sudanisation” and have wasted many lives. So, why do we insist on something that does not work and has caused us millions of lives and suffering? How long do we want to suffer? USSP believes that there is an opportunity to get out of the bondage of domination, and so I urge the people of Malakal to support the vision of an independent South Sudan as the only viable option for permanent peace. South Sudan cannot afford another civil war. So, I argue that if there is another war imposed on the South from Khartoum, let it be a war between two nation states.
We have no doubt that the CPA is an important contribution made since 1956 in an attempt to solve the problems facing Sudan to help build what is called the “New Sudan”, a New Sudan that is indeed a united Sudan. The question is why is Khartoum not implementing some key provisions of the CPA?
As you already know, the CPA represents a vision of self-determination which in itself is neither separation nor unity, but what is clear is that the CPA presents a vision of continued unity and, thus, it places emphasis on making unity attractive. It does not resolve the crucial issue of identity and so, technically, we are all Arabs. To me our main problem is not power sharing or wealth sharing. The main problem is our national identity that is being assimilated and the gradual occupation of our land. Power sharing and wealth sharing is secondary and so we must not misrepresent our case. We are not fighting just for power sharing and wealth but we are fighting to maintain our very existence as a nation. That is why USSP stands for the total independence of South Sudan. The delays in the demarcation of borders, the issue of census and the important question of ethnicity and religion were deliberately omitted to justify the claim that Sudan is an Arab country. If South Sudan chooses to ignore the history of how Sudan has become an Arab country, then the South has reason to be surprised as to why all the successive peace agreements between the South and the North have been abrogated and that the CPA may also follow suit.
The CPA creates institutions to accommodate more South Sudanese. As far as the northern elites are concerned, the problem of South Sudan is relegated to power and money. Do we really need all those huge institutions with so many constitutional post holders? No wonder the annual budget of South Sudan consumes 80% for wages and salaries. How many constitutional post holders do we need at this early stage? We are spending too much money to pay for wages and for people who are not doing the jobs that they are being paid to do. It is not only the question of over-employment of unclassified staff but we need to reconsider the number of constitutional post holders we have in South Sudan under the CPA. How much does it cost the average South Sudanese?
USSP believes that a small but efficient government is what is needed at this time so that government is able to save more money for frontline basic services such as health, schools, roads and bridges, clean drinking water, sanitation, food security, security of the person, etc. The Government of Southern Sudan must develop measures that ensure good governance, transparency and accountability so that the little money we get is spent for the public good. These are priorities USSP would like to see being taken care of by our GOSS.
There are also other important issues such as census, demarcation of borders and preparations for the forthcoming elections. Security is a major threat as we have foreign fighters operating in our territories with impunity. The government has full responsibility for the predatory attacks on our people and therefore the security of people living under its control must be taken seriously. We urge the full implementation of the CPA in order to sustain peace and stability before the elections. Brothers and sisters, we all have a duty towards our country to ensure that we get what we want in the forthcoming elections and the referendum in 2011.
Thank you very much for listening.
Clement Juma Mbugoniwia
Leader, United South Sudan Party
Speech by USSP Leader, Clement Juma Mbugoniwia
at a Political Rally in Malakal, the State Capital of Upper Nile State, During an Official Visit to the State
at a Political Rally in Malakal, the State Capital of Upper Nile State, During an Official Visit to the State
Greetings and thank you all for your time and warm reception!
By way of introduction, my name is Clement Juma Mbugoniwia. I hail from Tambura County in Western Equatoria State. Like many South Sudanese, I am one of the victims of the last twenty two years of civil war that has claimed the lives of more than 3 million fellow citizens in South Sudan. As a result of the war, I took refuge in exile where I have continued with other fellow South Sudanese to play our part in the liberation struggle for the freedom of our nation. I am a lawyer by profession.
I wish to take this opportunity to thank every one of you here for having come to participate in this political rally on the eve of my first visit to Malakal. It is a pleasure for me to be here with you this evening. I am aware of the fact that the people of Greater Malakal are politically conscious. They rejected and resisted the invasion of foreign aggression more than a century ago in the form of the Nuer uprising for freedom, the Shilluk resistance and the role of the Mac which is equally acknowledged. Therefore, I am not here to propose anything new but to assert the importance and necessity of continuing with the struggle for an independent sovereign state as the only viable alternative to sustainable peace, prosperity and the maintenance of our national identity as a people. I am here to confirm that freedom requires sacrifice. The sacrifice that is demanded of us all is not greater or less than the sacrifice that millions of our fellow brothers and sisters have made throughout generations, sometimes with their own blood, land and resources, and I thank each one of those men and women for that.
United South Sudan Party was formed in 2005 out of the need to work for the vision of an independent South Sudan — a South Sudan that is based on true democratic principles, the rule of law and respect for human rights and civil liberties; a South Sudan where tribalism, nepotism and favouritism have no place; a South Sudan that provides opportunities for all regardless of their background; a South Sudan that does not tolerate corruption and the abuse of power; a South Sudan that is inclusive of its diversity; and a South Sudan where discrimination on the basis of tribe is made a criminal offence punishable by law.
As a party, we in USSP believe that the aspiration of the people of South Sudan for an independent homeland comes first before any other vision or policy. The fact that Sudan has been at war with itself for several decades justifies that Sudan has never been one nor will it afford to be one at any given time. Even the British who ruled Sudan before the 1956 independence acknowledged that South Sudan was a different nation and, thus, they introduced what was then known as the ‘Closed District Act’ to administer the South separately. Historically, the Sudan was not an Arab country, as claimed by the minority Arab rulers in Khartoum, but a land of the blacks who inhabited the Sudan. The fact that Sudan has now become referred to as an Arab country without the consent of the majority black Africans justifies the reasons for the protracted wars and the destruction. Now, whether we like it or not, we are technically Arabs as Sudan is officially an Arab country. Unless the South accepts the status quo as third class citizens, war will continue to haunt the people of South Sudan. It is a war that is imposed on the South because of its identity and land. In other words, the North is committed to its policy of Arabisation and Islamisation of Africa, and South Sudan is a gateway. It is for this reason that Khartoum has never honoured any agreement that seems to give the South some recognition as an entity, nor will it respect the CPA which even calls for making unity attractive.
Brothers and sisters, we have been at war even before the creation of “Sudanisation” and have wasted many lives. So, why do we insist on something that does not work and has caused us millions of lives and suffering? How long do we want to suffer? USSP believes that there is an opportunity to get out of the bondage of domination, and so I urge the people of Malakal to support the vision of an independent South Sudan as the only viable option for permanent peace. South Sudan cannot afford another civil war. So, I argue that if there is another war imposed on the South from Khartoum, let it be a war between two nation states.
We have no doubt that the CPA is an important contribution made since 1956 in an attempt to solve the problems facing Sudan to help build what is called the “New Sudan”, a New Sudan that is indeed a united Sudan. The question is why is Khartoum not implementing some key provisions of the CPA?
As you already know, the CPA represents a vision of self-determination which in itself is neither separation nor unity, but what is clear is that the CPA presents a vision of continued unity and, thus, it places emphasis on making unity attractive. It does not resolve the crucial issue of identity and so, technically, we are all Arabs. To me our main problem is not power sharing or wealth sharing. The main problem is our national identity that is being assimilated and the gradual occupation of our land. Power sharing and wealth sharing is secondary and so we must not misrepresent our case. We are not fighting just for power sharing and wealth but we are fighting to maintain our very existence as a nation. That is why USSP stands for the total independence of South Sudan. The delays in the demarcation of borders, the issue of census and the important question of ethnicity and religion were deliberately omitted to justify the claim that Sudan is an Arab country. If South Sudan chooses to ignore the history of how Sudan has become an Arab country, then the South has reason to be surprised as to why all the successive peace agreements between the South and the North have been abrogated and that the CPA may also follow suit.
The CPA creates institutions to accommodate more South Sudanese. As far as the northern elites are concerned, the problem of South Sudan is relegated to power and money. Do we really need all those huge institutions with so many constitutional post holders? No wonder the annual budget of South Sudan consumes 80% for wages and salaries. How many constitutional post holders do we need at this early stage? We are spending too much money to pay for wages and for people who are not doing the jobs that they are being paid to do. It is not only the question of over-employment of unclassified staff but we need to reconsider the number of constitutional post holders we have in South Sudan under the CPA. How much does it cost the average South Sudanese?
USSP believes that a small but efficient government is what is needed at this time so that government is able to save more money for frontline basic services such as health, schools, roads and bridges, clean drinking water, sanitation, food security, security of the person, etc. The Government of Southern Sudan must develop measures that ensure good governance, transparency and accountability so that the little money we get is spent for the public good. These are priorities USSP would like to see being taken care of by our GOSS.
There are also other important issues such as census, demarcation of borders and preparations for the forthcoming elections. Security is a major threat as we have foreign fighters operating in our territories with impunity. The government has full responsibility for the predatory attacks on our people and therefore the security of people living under its control must be taken seriously. We urge the full implementation of the CPA in order to sustain peace and stability before the elections. Brothers and sisters, we all have a duty towards our country to ensure that we get what we want in the forthcoming elections and the referendum in 2011.
Thank you very much for listening.
Clement Juma Mbugoniwia
Leader, United South Sudan Party
Saturday, 6 December 2008
USSP Position on the South-South Dialogue Held in Juba 8—13 November 2008
Download position paper...
24 November 2008
The formation of the so-called “Leadership Forum” in South Sudan is a death warrant to the opposition parties.
The South-South Dialogue between the SPLM and the Alliance of Southern Sudanese Political Parties was held in November in Juba, the capital of the semi-autonomous South Sudan, where many problems were highlighted and proposed solutions put forward by the participants. While some of the resolutions of the Dialogue may be acceptable, it must be stressed that not all the resolutions can be swallowed without questioning their bitter taste—not least the resolution to form the so-called “Leadership Forum”, to be chaired by SPLM with the membership of all the other South Sudanese political parties.
USSP believe that any inter-party co-operation should not be at the expense of maintaining a strong opposition for the sake of fostering and exercising democracy in the South's new-born government. There is no doubt that it is healthy for all the political parties operating in South Sudan to come together from time to time—as an entity—to discuss major challenges to the national interests of South Sudan, and, indeed, more South-South dialogues are needed to consolidate a common stand on common issues. Given the importance of South Sudanese political formations coming together to discuss matters of common concern, it is important to note that future South-South dialogues should not be confined to political parties alone but should also include other stakeholders such as chiefs, religious leaders and those directly or indirectly affected by the acts of war in South Sudan. This will help to solidify the unity of the South Sudanese people towards common goals. With the latest political developments which have resulted from the South-South Dialogue, we are all left in a lot of political concern as all the South Sudanese political parties are now opting to join the SPLM directly or indirectly by joining the SPLM-led Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS), mostly for personal and financial gains, thus compromising their supposed opposition role.
The idea of a “Leadership Forum” consisting of all South Sudanese political parties aimed to follow up the resolutions of the South-South Dialogue is not in itself a bad idea, provided that the chairmanship of the Forum rotates among all the other political parties so as to ensure good intent and transparency. The fact that the SPLM as a ruling party in South Sudan will now chair the “Leadership Forum” to the exclusion of other political parties indicates that the SPLM has issued a death warrant to the opposition parties and is thereby intent to drag South Sudan into a totalitarian system of governance where opposition does not exist. USSP believe that such a move is not healthy for a speedy democratic transformation in South Sudan. Politics in a democratic setting is an exercise of competition, just like the sport of football or basketball or any other sport where there is competition between two or more teams, even though all of the participants may strongly believe in the overall maintenance and promotion of the sport itself. This is indeed true of politics where political parties compete based on their programmes and still believe in maintaining good political practices, the provision of quality services to the citizens, as well as observing their national interests and welfare. You cannot promote sports if you have only one team. Whatsoever activities the team may get engaged in will only amount to no more than routine training, and without any real outside tournaments, this team will remain unchallenged and will become carried away with a false sense of perfection, only to be realised when the spectators and the fans start boycotting the team and the sport because of boredom and lack of creativity.
The current policies of the NCP and the SPLM to swallow within their ranks all the other political parties are really unhealthy. This can be considered typical of African politics where multi-party systems are usually not tolerated by those in power. African leaders easily become little gods, because we the masses allow them to become such little gods. Sadly, we also breed the most opportunistic opposition leaders in the world who are easily wavered by the ruling parties in return for posts, money, or other personal favours. The present government of South Sudan headed by President Salva Kiir Mayardit has time and time again come under attack from the other political parties and the South Sudanese citizens for its poor performance, but now as these political parties have joined hands with the SPLM and the GOSS, then obviously their role as active opposition has been compromised if not completely eroded. At this juncture, it would be perfectly understandable to rule out any opposition to the many malpractices of the GOSS and the South Sudanese citizens would have been let down by the Alliance of South Sudanese Political Parties (ASSPP) once their leaderships join the proposed “Leadership Forum” to be chaired by SPLM.
Clement Juma Mbugoniwia
Leader, United South Sudan Party
The formation of the so-called “Leadership Forum” in South Sudan is a death warrant to the opposition parties.
The South-South Dialogue between the SPLM and the Alliance of Southern Sudanese Political Parties was held in November in Juba, the capital of the semi-autonomous South Sudan, where many problems were highlighted and proposed solutions put forward by the participants. While some of the resolutions of the Dialogue may be acceptable, it must be stressed that not all the resolutions can be swallowed without questioning their bitter taste—not least the resolution to form the so-called “Leadership Forum”, to be chaired by SPLM with the membership of all the other South Sudanese political parties.
USSP believe that any inter-party co-operation should not be at the expense of maintaining a strong opposition for the sake of fostering and exercising democracy in the South's new-born government. There is no doubt that it is healthy for all the political parties operating in South Sudan to come together from time to time—as an entity—to discuss major challenges to the national interests of South Sudan, and, indeed, more South-South dialogues are needed to consolidate a common stand on common issues. Given the importance of South Sudanese political formations coming together to discuss matters of common concern, it is important to note that future South-South dialogues should not be confined to political parties alone but should also include other stakeholders such as chiefs, religious leaders and those directly or indirectly affected by the acts of war in South Sudan. This will help to solidify the unity of the South Sudanese people towards common goals. With the latest political developments which have resulted from the South-South Dialogue, we are all left in a lot of political concern as all the South Sudanese political parties are now opting to join the SPLM directly or indirectly by joining the SPLM-led Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS), mostly for personal and financial gains, thus compromising their supposed opposition role.
The idea of a “Leadership Forum” consisting of all South Sudanese political parties aimed to follow up the resolutions of the South-South Dialogue is not in itself a bad idea, provided that the chairmanship of the Forum rotates among all the other political parties so as to ensure good intent and transparency. The fact that the SPLM as a ruling party in South Sudan will now chair the “Leadership Forum” to the exclusion of other political parties indicates that the SPLM has issued a death warrant to the opposition parties and is thereby intent to drag South Sudan into a totalitarian system of governance where opposition does not exist. USSP believe that such a move is not healthy for a speedy democratic transformation in South Sudan. Politics in a democratic setting is an exercise of competition, just like the sport of football or basketball or any other sport where there is competition between two or more teams, even though all of the participants may strongly believe in the overall maintenance and promotion of the sport itself. This is indeed true of politics where political parties compete based on their programmes and still believe in maintaining good political practices, the provision of quality services to the citizens, as well as observing their national interests and welfare. You cannot promote sports if you have only one team. Whatsoever activities the team may get engaged in will only amount to no more than routine training, and without any real outside tournaments, this team will remain unchallenged and will become carried away with a false sense of perfection, only to be realised when the spectators and the fans start boycotting the team and the sport because of boredom and lack of creativity.
The current policies of the NCP and the SPLM to swallow within their ranks all the other political parties are really unhealthy. This can be considered typical of African politics where multi-party systems are usually not tolerated by those in power. African leaders easily become little gods, because we the masses allow them to become such little gods. Sadly, we also breed the most opportunistic opposition leaders in the world who are easily wavered by the ruling parties in return for posts, money, or other personal favours. The present government of South Sudan headed by President Salva Kiir Mayardit has time and time again come under attack from the other political parties and the South Sudanese citizens for its poor performance, but now as these political parties have joined hands with the SPLM and the GOSS, then obviously their role as active opposition has been compromised if not completely eroded. At this juncture, it would be perfectly understandable to rule out any opposition to the many malpractices of the GOSS and the South Sudanese citizens would have been let down by the Alliance of South Sudanese Political Parties (ASSPP) once their leaderships join the proposed “Leadership Forum” to be chaired by SPLM.
Clement Juma Mbugoniwia
Leader, United South Sudan Party
Thursday, 3 July 2008
USSP is NOT PARTY to the “Alliance of South Sudan Political Parties”
Download press release...
◊ PRESS RELEASE ◊
We refer to the Sudan Tribune articles of 29 and 30 June 2008 (published online on 30 June and 1 July 2008 respectively) which stated that “Eight Southern Sudanese political parties [had] established a new alliance...” The names of the Southern Sudanese political parties listed in the articles included United South Sudan Party (USSP).
We, the leadership of USSP, would like to make it categorically clear that United South Sudan Party (USSP) is not party to the said alliance. USSP sent a delegation to attend the Juba conference of South Sudanese political parties, “Building Consensus on What Unites”, only to listen to the views of other parties in South Sudan and to present USSP’s views and stance on important national issues such as Peace, Democracy, Unity among South Sudanese people and the 2011 Referendum, but not to join in an alliance. We see exchanging views with other parties as a healthy and democratic activity. The terms of reference of the USSP delegation sent to the conference in
Therefore, USSP reiterates categorically, and in no uncertain terms, that it is not party to the said alliance, its aims and any agreement that led to its formation. USSP believes that it can co-operate with other parties on matters of common interest to
Clement Mbugoniwia
Party Leader
Friday, 27 June 2008
USSP Leader Meets Western Equatoria State Officials
While on a visit to Yambio, the state capital of Western Equatoria State, the leader of United South Sudan Party, Mr Clement Mbugoniwia, has held a series of meetings this week with key Western Equatoria State officials, including the Deputy Governor, Col. Joseph Ngere Paciko, and a number of ministers. He has also met with the Speaker of the State Assembly, Mr Richard Noti MP. In addition, he will be meeting the Paramount Chief of Yambio County, Mr Wilson Hassen Peni, on Friday.
© USSP
Thursday, 19 June 2008
Why are South Sudanese scattered all over the Sudanese political spectra when they have the South’s independence to vote for in 2011?
By Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba, M.D.
Download article...
The South Sudanese political position throughout history has been a most bewildering and confusing one. The traditional political parties in the North have been founded on the Islamic faith as a continuum of the Arabs’ non-ending dream to establish a great nation of Islam in the Sudanese belt of the African continent.
In the above vision, the South Sudanese have all throughout been left out in the cold either because of their strong African identity (incompatible with the state-declared pan-Arabism) or for the simple fact that they are perceived to be second-class citizens by their Arab fellows from the North. In the past, all the Northern political parties were automatically identified as national parties though they offered no hope of progress to the South. To the Northern mindset, it is they (Northerners) to think, plan and run the entire country, while the South must have whatsoever remains which usually is not much.
However, the South Sudanese in their struggle for a fair share and equal treatment in the Sudanese nation were all over the place. There were those who used to think that the South would stop to exist the moment it faced the North or even simply initiated any form of resistance to its arabization policies. So it was not a surprise in those days to see a good number of South Sudanese with memberships in all the Northern sectarian parties of the Umma, Khatimiya, the Sudanese Communist Party, the Ba’ath Pan-Arab Party, the Sudanese Socialist Union (SSU) and, lately, the National Islamic Front—even in its rivalling groups (the National Congress Party of President Bashir and the People’s Congress of Sheik al-Turabi), and worse still the so-called National Democratic Alliance, which is practically nothing but a scrub yard for all those failed policies of the traditional ruling triads of the historical cunning Shaigyiya, the arrogant Danagla and the most notorious and stubborn Jaalei’yin, who would want to dominate the Sudanese political arena using any tickets and the latest being the “New Sudan” delusion.
All these traditional Sudanese political parties in their struggles to get to the seat of power in Khartoum have seriously sought two strategies against any Southern opposition to their rule. Firstly, they have sought the destruction of the emergence of tough and secessionist leaderships in the South by making sure that all the potential leaders are brought into some sort of collusions with the different political parties. These dubious collusions have provided ways to the North through their Southern agents to keep track and effectively sabotage any anti-unity elements and organisations that are rapidly developing everywhere in the South and amongst the South Sudanese communities in the Diaspora up to these days. Based on this strategy, most of these parties have gone in length to establish Southern secretariats in the various Arab-controlled political parties and institutions with the basic aim of actually dealing blows to the South’s aspirations for an independent nation. Secondly, the North has developed in the South a generation of corrupt leaderships who have become addicts to institutionalised corruption and bribery. This second strategy has worked well in paralysing the emergence of real patriotic leaderships in the South, armed with genuine political abilities to unify the Southern masses in the fight against the widespread tribalism which is now devouring our nation of South Sudan.
Up until now South Sudanese find it hard to resist the repeated temptations of joining the Sudanese unity-oriented policies that continue to surface up, without critically analysing how vulnerable the South remains in such a setting which has always favoured the Arab and Islamic superiority over the indigenous African cultures and beliefs. You just need to hear the sporadic calls for unity of the entire Sudan, which some prefer to call the “New Sudan” in some SPLM circles, and you will know that the Northern Arabs are still in control of some Southern minds.
South Sudanese are to count on themselves in shaping their destiny and not what is happening elsewhere. It is because the SPLM has been conceived basically by power-hungry individuals, now even before properly securing their grip on the South they are already salivating to extend their rule over to Darfur and Eastern Sudan.
Is the philosophy of the emancipation of the marginalised people of the Sudan really justified to overrule the blood-documented rights of the South Sudanese to live in an independent nation of their own? This is not fair as far as our struggle to establish an independent state is concerned, because it is really not up to particular politicians to redefine the real problems and troubles which the people of South Sudan have undergone. It is enough that 2 million and more have died just within a period of two decades and more than 4 million displaced and scattered all over the globe. If a South Sudanese sees that he or she has a good chance of winning the leadership of the entire Sudan, this individual’s aspirations should not in any way allow the aspirant to redefine the goals of the South Sudanese struggles which started since time immemorial. I think if there are people, particularly in the South, who feel that they have a moral role to play in Darfur and the other parts of Sudan in their struggles against the Khartoum government, they can go on but without compromising the legitimate right of the South Sudanese people to aspire for an independent nation of their own.
Leave the Northerners to rule themselves under their Islamic system for which they have always fought against us including the Darfuris. They will know how to sort out that house and we should never fool ourselves anymore about the delusions of a united, secular Sudan, which is not in any part of the political histories of the various governments which existed in the North (never was it secular in the Darfur sultanates, nor the Funj kingdoms). These were Muslims ruled by the Qur’an, please leave them to themselves and let us think of how we can develop the South, rather than waste our efforts all over the place.
To those who think that the South can further destabilise the North in an attempt to weaken the NIF/NCP grip on the desert capital of Khartoum, you need to be ready for more military confrontations than negotiations. What that signifies is that the more people in the North who rebel against the centre, the more wars need to be fought. And can these wars not be better fought when the South is a strong, independent state, if there be a need? Though the lack of development has been sighted many times as the main reason for the repeated uprisings in the South, it seems many of these uprisings have really been driven by our wish to run our own affairs. Yet now we are hearing of some Southern Sudanese breeds who would want even to stay with the traditional enemy if only they could succeed in deceiving us to believe their power-motivated last minute change of heart.
Download article...
The South Sudanese political position throughout history has been a most bewildering and confusing one. The traditional political parties in the North have been founded on the Islamic faith as a continuum of the Arabs’ non-ending dream to establish a great nation of Islam in the Sudanese belt of the African continent.
In the above vision, the South Sudanese have all throughout been left out in the cold either because of their strong African identity (incompatible with the state-declared pan-Arabism) or for the simple fact that they are perceived to be second-class citizens by their Arab fellows from the North. In the past, all the Northern political parties were automatically identified as national parties though they offered no hope of progress to the South. To the Northern mindset, it is they (Northerners) to think, plan and run the entire country, while the South must have whatsoever remains which usually is not much.
However, the South Sudanese in their struggle for a fair share and equal treatment in the Sudanese nation were all over the place. There were those who used to think that the South would stop to exist the moment it faced the North or even simply initiated any form of resistance to its arabization policies. So it was not a surprise in those days to see a good number of South Sudanese with memberships in all the Northern sectarian parties of the Umma, Khatimiya, the Sudanese Communist Party, the Ba’ath Pan-Arab Party, the Sudanese Socialist Union (SSU) and, lately, the National Islamic Front—even in its rivalling groups (the National Congress Party of President Bashir and the People’s Congress of Sheik al-Turabi), and worse still the so-called National Democratic Alliance, which is practically nothing but a scrub yard for all those failed policies of the traditional ruling triads of the historical cunning Shaigyiya, the arrogant Danagla and the most notorious and stubborn Jaalei’yin, who would want to dominate the Sudanese political arena using any tickets and the latest being the “New Sudan” delusion.
All these traditional Sudanese political parties in their struggles to get to the seat of power in Khartoum have seriously sought two strategies against any Southern opposition to their rule. Firstly, they have sought the destruction of the emergence of tough and secessionist leaderships in the South by making sure that all the potential leaders are brought into some sort of collusions with the different political parties. These dubious collusions have provided ways to the North through their Southern agents to keep track and effectively sabotage any anti-unity elements and organisations that are rapidly developing everywhere in the South and amongst the South Sudanese communities in the Diaspora up to these days. Based on this strategy, most of these parties have gone in length to establish Southern secretariats in the various Arab-controlled political parties and institutions with the basic aim of actually dealing blows to the South’s aspirations for an independent nation. Secondly, the North has developed in the South a generation of corrupt leaderships who have become addicts to institutionalised corruption and bribery. This second strategy has worked well in paralysing the emergence of real patriotic leaderships in the South, armed with genuine political abilities to unify the Southern masses in the fight against the widespread tribalism which is now devouring our nation of South Sudan.
Up until now South Sudanese find it hard to resist the repeated temptations of joining the Sudanese unity-oriented policies that continue to surface up, without critically analysing how vulnerable the South remains in such a setting which has always favoured the Arab and Islamic superiority over the indigenous African cultures and beliefs. You just need to hear the sporadic calls for unity of the entire Sudan, which some prefer to call the “New Sudan” in some SPLM circles, and you will know that the Northern Arabs are still in control of some Southern minds.
South Sudanese are to count on themselves in shaping their destiny and not what is happening elsewhere. It is because the SPLM has been conceived basically by power-hungry individuals, now even before properly securing their grip on the South they are already salivating to extend their rule over to Darfur and Eastern Sudan.
Is the philosophy of the emancipation of the marginalised people of the Sudan really justified to overrule the blood-documented rights of the South Sudanese to live in an independent nation of their own? This is not fair as far as our struggle to establish an independent state is concerned, because it is really not up to particular politicians to redefine the real problems and troubles which the people of South Sudan have undergone. It is enough that 2 million and more have died just within a period of two decades and more than 4 million displaced and scattered all over the globe. If a South Sudanese sees that he or she has a good chance of winning the leadership of the entire Sudan, this individual’s aspirations should not in any way allow the aspirant to redefine the goals of the South Sudanese struggles which started since time immemorial. I think if there are people, particularly in the South, who feel that they have a moral role to play in Darfur and the other parts of Sudan in their struggles against the Khartoum government, they can go on but without compromising the legitimate right of the South Sudanese people to aspire for an independent nation of their own.
Leave the Northerners to rule themselves under their Islamic system for which they have always fought against us including the Darfuris. They will know how to sort out that house and we should never fool ourselves anymore about the delusions of a united, secular Sudan, which is not in any part of the political histories of the various governments which existed in the North (never was it secular in the Darfur sultanates, nor the Funj kingdoms). These were Muslims ruled by the Qur’an, please leave them to themselves and let us think of how we can develop the South, rather than waste our efforts all over the place.
To those who think that the South can further destabilise the North in an attempt to weaken the NIF/NCP grip on the desert capital of Khartoum, you need to be ready for more military confrontations than negotiations. What that signifies is that the more people in the North who rebel against the centre, the more wars need to be fought. And can these wars not be better fought when the South is a strong, independent state, if there be a need? Though the lack of development has been sighted many times as the main reason for the repeated uprisings in the South, it seems many of these uprisings have really been driven by our wish to run our own affairs. Yet now we are hearing of some Southern Sudanese breeds who would want even to stay with the traditional enemy if only they could succeed in deceiving us to believe their power-motivated last minute change of heart.
[Archive] Letter on Abyei Crisis
Rt Hon Gordon Brown (MP)
Prime Minister
Her Majesty's Government
United Kingdom
Wednesday, 28th May 2008
Concern About the Deteriorating Situation in Abyei, South Sudan
United South Sudan Party (USSP) is a South Sudanese political party formed after the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005 between the Government of Sudan (GOS) and the Sudan Peoples' Liberation Movement (SPLM). One of the fundamental aims of USSP is to represent the true aspirations of the majority of the people of South Sudan for an independent country as a means to securing permanent peace in the region, peace which is based on what the people actually want. We, in USSP, would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to your government and others we have not mentioned here that contributed tremendously to the peace effort in South Sudan by securing the CPA. We hope that you will continue to support the CPA by ensuring that all its protocols are implemented fully to achieve its aims and objectives.
We are very concerned that fighting has been intensifying in Abyei with the Government of Sudan being excessively heavy handed and bombing innocent civilians in the area. Reports coming out of the area indicate that the town of Abyei itself has been reduced to rubble by the Government of Sudan. This is a direct violation of the peace agreement (CPA) which you all helped to put in place. We believe, therefore, that you will not let the situation to deteriorate any further. A strong pressure must be brought to bear on the Government of Sudan to stop the wanton destruction it is causing to life in the area. The attitude of the Government of Sudan has all along been very clear in the way it is dragging its feet over the case of the border between South Sudan and Northern Sudan and the destiny of Abyei. We believe that you will agree with us that this action of the GOS should not be allowed to continue and must be condemned in the strongest terms possible.
What we have indicated above about the attitude and arrogance of the GOS is clear from the following pieces of evidence and examples:
The GOS has deliberately not implemented one of the key protocols of the CPA which is the demarcation of the border between the South and the North in accordance with the timetable stipulated by the CPA. The GOS and the National Congress Party (NCP), the senior partner to the CPA, are unwilling to demarcate the border, choosing to first displace the indigenous people of Abyei and move the North-South border southwards to engulf the oil fields of South Sudan to be geographically counted as part of Northern Sudan. The International Community, especially the parties that helped to bring about the CPA such as the government of the United Kingdom, need to be aware of this dirty trick of the NCP and GOS.
The National Congress Party (NCP) and the Government of Sudan (GOS) are also in breach of the CPA by not withdrawing Northern Sudanese troops from South Sudan as stipulated and scheduled by the CPA. The presence of these troops in the South beyond the timetable stipulated by the CPA is largely to blame for the renewed hostilities in the Abyei area between the SPLA (Sudan Peoples' Liberation Army) and Government troops. It can be safely assumed that this is the desired aim of the NCP and GOS to give themselves an excuse to ruthlessly destroy the South as can be witnessed in the current renewed fighting in Abyei. Without intervention by the International Community and the partners to the CPA, this renewed fighting is most likely to plunge the whole region back into full-scale war! This fear has also been expressed by the SPLM's Secretary-General, Pagan Amum, when he stated in news conference in Khartoum that "we are on the brink of war as we speak". [Reuters May 26, 2008]
In addition to Reuters, the fighting in the South Sudanese oil-rich area of Abyei has been reported by a number of other media sources and eye witnesses in South Sudan. It will not be difficult for the International Community to establish the facts for themselves. Such facts will need to be established independently of Sudan Government sources which are well known for concealing facts. There have been reports of between 30,000 and 50,000 civilians having been displaced from Abyei as a result of attacks by the Government of Sudan. According to a Sudan Armed Forces spokesperson speaking on Omdurman TV, at least 24 government troops have been killed in the fighting and more than 50 injured. This report did not disclose the number of civilian casualties who might have been caught up in the fighting but, we believe, the civilian casualties may be much higher than troops.
As a result of the displacement of thousands of families from Abyei area, there is a serious need for humanitarian assistance to the displaced people so as to avoid the escalation of further human catastrophe.
United South Sudan Party (USSP) hereby urges you, the main partners to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the International Community in general, to condemn the action of the Sudan National Congress Party (NCP) and the Sudanese Government in the strongest terms ever so as to stop them from taking the country back to war and destroying human lives in South Sudan. We also urge your immediate intervention to stop these violations of the CPA and device a mechanism to strengthen the UN peace-keeping operations in South Sudan so as to enable them to keep peace more effectively with the ability to detect any future violations of this kind.
Thank you very much.
Clement Mbugoniwia
Leader, United South Sudan Party (USSP)
CC:
- The Rt Hon David Cameron (MP) -- Leader, Conservative Party
- The Rt Hon Nick Clegg (MP) -- Leader, Liberal Democrats
- Hon David Drew (MP) -- Chair, Associate Parliamentary Group on Sudan
- United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS)
- Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
Prime Minister
Her Majesty's Government
United Kingdom
Wednesday, 28th May 2008
Concern About the Deteriorating Situation in Abyei, South Sudan
United South Sudan Party (USSP) is a South Sudanese political party formed after the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005 between the Government of Sudan (GOS) and the Sudan Peoples' Liberation Movement (SPLM). One of the fundamental aims of USSP is to represent the true aspirations of the majority of the people of South Sudan for an independent country as a means to securing permanent peace in the region, peace which is based on what the people actually want. We, in USSP, would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to your government and others we have not mentioned here that contributed tremendously to the peace effort in South Sudan by securing the CPA. We hope that you will continue to support the CPA by ensuring that all its protocols are implemented fully to achieve its aims and objectives.
We are very concerned that fighting has been intensifying in Abyei with the Government of Sudan being excessively heavy handed and bombing innocent civilians in the area. Reports coming out of the area indicate that the town of Abyei itself has been reduced to rubble by the Government of Sudan. This is a direct violation of the peace agreement (CPA) which you all helped to put in place. We believe, therefore, that you will not let the situation to deteriorate any further. A strong pressure must be brought to bear on the Government of Sudan to stop the wanton destruction it is causing to life in the area. The attitude of the Government of Sudan has all along been very clear in the way it is dragging its feet over the case of the border between South Sudan and Northern Sudan and the destiny of Abyei. We believe that you will agree with us that this action of the GOS should not be allowed to continue and must be condemned in the strongest terms possible.
What we have indicated above about the attitude and arrogance of the GOS is clear from the following pieces of evidence and examples:
The GOS has deliberately not implemented one of the key protocols of the CPA which is the demarcation of the border between the South and the North in accordance with the timetable stipulated by the CPA. The GOS and the National Congress Party (NCP), the senior partner to the CPA, are unwilling to demarcate the border, choosing to first displace the indigenous people of Abyei and move the North-South border southwards to engulf the oil fields of South Sudan to be geographically counted as part of Northern Sudan. The International Community, especially the parties that helped to bring about the CPA such as the government of the United Kingdom, need to be aware of this dirty trick of the NCP and GOS.
The National Congress Party (NCP) and the Government of Sudan (GOS) are also in breach of the CPA by not withdrawing Northern Sudanese troops from South Sudan as stipulated and scheduled by the CPA. The presence of these troops in the South beyond the timetable stipulated by the CPA is largely to blame for the renewed hostilities in the Abyei area between the SPLA (Sudan Peoples' Liberation Army) and Government troops. It can be safely assumed that this is the desired aim of the NCP and GOS to give themselves an excuse to ruthlessly destroy the South as can be witnessed in the current renewed fighting in Abyei. Without intervention by the International Community and the partners to the CPA, this renewed fighting is most likely to plunge the whole region back into full-scale war! This fear has also been expressed by the SPLM's Secretary-General, Pagan Amum, when he stated in news conference in Khartoum that "we are on the brink of war as we speak". [Reuters May 26, 2008]
In addition to Reuters, the fighting in the South Sudanese oil-rich area of Abyei has been reported by a number of other media sources and eye witnesses in South Sudan. It will not be difficult for the International Community to establish the facts for themselves. Such facts will need to be established independently of Sudan Government sources which are well known for concealing facts. There have been reports of between 30,000 and 50,000 civilians having been displaced from Abyei as a result of attacks by the Government of Sudan. According to a Sudan Armed Forces spokesperson speaking on Omdurman TV, at least 24 government troops have been killed in the fighting and more than 50 injured. This report did not disclose the number of civilian casualties who might have been caught up in the fighting but, we believe, the civilian casualties may be much higher than troops.
As a result of the displacement of thousands of families from Abyei area, there is a serious need for humanitarian assistance to the displaced people so as to avoid the escalation of further human catastrophe.
United South Sudan Party (USSP) hereby urges you, the main partners to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the International Community in general, to condemn the action of the Sudan National Congress Party (NCP) and the Sudanese Government in the strongest terms ever so as to stop them from taking the country back to war and destroying human lives in South Sudan. We also urge your immediate intervention to stop these violations of the CPA and device a mechanism to strengthen the UN peace-keeping operations in South Sudan so as to enable them to keep peace more effectively with the ability to detect any future violations of this kind.
Thank you very much.
Clement Mbugoniwia
Leader, United South Sudan Party (USSP)
CC:
- The Rt Hon David Cameron (MP) -- Leader, Conservative Party
- The Rt Hon Nick Clegg (MP) -- Leader, Liberal Democrats
- Hon David Drew (MP) -- Chair, Associate Parliamentary Group on Sudan
- United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS)
- Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
Monday, 14 April 2008
PRESS STATEMENT: The Decision By the GOSS to Defer Census in South Sudan and GONU's Reversal of the Decision
Monday, 14 April 2008
Only about a couple of days ago the SPLM-led Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS) had considered it necessary to postpone the South Sudan portion of tonight's [15 April 2008] census until towards the end of the year, as "... it would not achieve the objectives for which it was intended," according to GOSS Information Minister Gabriel Changson Chang. In addition to the key questions of ethnicity and religion, which have for some reason been omitted from the census questionnaire, there are clearly a number of other key pending issues that are yet to be addressed, such as the demarcation of the North-South border and repatriation of over 2 million South Sudanese IDPs [internally displaced persons] in the North and also those in neighbouring countries. But the GOSS has now apparently reneged on their postponement decision or was it perhaps a case of "arm-twisting" that they have been forced into agreeing to a unilateral reversal of their decision by Omar Hassan al-Bashir, President of the Republic—as reported in the media—that the census has now been rescheduled to go ahead on 22 April 2008!
We in the United South Sudan Party (USSP) believe that the GOSS decision and reaction―though legitimate―have come rather too little, too late!
1. If the GOSS was part of the census planning process right from the beginning, why did they not build in safeguards for South Sudan, given that they had several months to prepare? On the issue of ethnicity and religion, for example, reports cite UN overseers as claiming that "... compromise has already been reached over religion and ethnicity". Have the GOSS been part of reaching such a compromise?
2. If the GOSS believe that the issues of ethinicity, religion and repatriation are crucial and legitimate—as they certainly are—how come they do not pursue the issues very determinedly and have already given in so easily to the position of the Government in Khartoum? Are they really capable of standing up firmly for what is right for South Sudan?
3. Why were the GOSS not very prompt and serious about repatriation as soon as they came to power after signing the CPA if, as stated by Minister Chang, "... there is undue influence in Khartoum in preventing the IDPs from coming back to the South"? Even those who signed the Addis Ababa Peace Accord in 1972 were much faster in dealing with repatriation than the GOSS. The SPLM's Deputy Secretary General, Yasir Arman's statement on repatriation that "... there were some concerns but the two sides [GOSS and GONU] agreed on ways to expedite the return of South Sudanese IDPs to their homes..." does not seem to hold much water. How realistic is such repatriation before next week's rescheduled census as opposed to the last three years?
The GOSS seem to be bogged down with less important matters [e.g. corruption, nepotism and tribalism] than the things that really matter politically for South Sudan. In that case, the vision of the GOSS is questionable.
4. Khartoum is raising the question of money already spent on preparation for census. But money spent by the GOSS on wrong ways of doing things will always be wasted! That is why political decisions need to be transparent and well debated widely before implementation to avoid backtracking by certain quarters or dissatisfaction by others, resulting in financial wastage.
All the above matters raise the issue of the credibility of the GOSS. They do not seem to do the right thing at the right time. How can the people of South Sudan be entirely confident of the leadership of the GOSS? In three years, it is apparent that the GOSS haven't proven themselves capable!
Clement Juma Mbugoniwia
Leader, USSP
© United South Sudan Party
Only about a couple of days ago the SPLM-led Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS) had considered it necessary to postpone the South Sudan portion of tonight's [15 April 2008] census until towards the end of the year, as "... it would not achieve the objectives for which it was intended," according to GOSS Information Minister Gabriel Changson Chang. In addition to the key questions of ethnicity and religion, which have for some reason been omitted from the census questionnaire, there are clearly a number of other key pending issues that are yet to be addressed, such as the demarcation of the North-South border and repatriation of over 2 million South Sudanese IDPs [internally displaced persons] in the North and also those in neighbouring countries. But the GOSS has now apparently reneged on their postponement decision or was it perhaps a case of "arm-twisting" that they have been forced into agreeing to a unilateral reversal of their decision by Omar Hassan al-Bashir, President of the Republic—as reported in the media—that the census has now been rescheduled to go ahead on 22 April 2008!
We in the United South Sudan Party (USSP) believe that the GOSS decision and reaction―though legitimate―have come rather too little, too late!
1. If the GOSS was part of the census planning process right from the beginning, why did they not build in safeguards for South Sudan, given that they had several months to prepare? On the issue of ethnicity and religion, for example, reports cite UN overseers as claiming that "... compromise has already been reached over religion and ethnicity". Have the GOSS been part of reaching such a compromise?
2. If the GOSS believe that the issues of ethinicity, religion and repatriation are crucial and legitimate—as they certainly are—how come they do not pursue the issues very determinedly and have already given in so easily to the position of the Government in Khartoum? Are they really capable of standing up firmly for what is right for South Sudan?
3. Why were the GOSS not very prompt and serious about repatriation as soon as they came to power after signing the CPA if, as stated by Minister Chang, "... there is undue influence in Khartoum in preventing the IDPs from coming back to the South"? Even those who signed the Addis Ababa Peace Accord in 1972 were much faster in dealing with repatriation than the GOSS. The SPLM's Deputy Secretary General, Yasir Arman's statement on repatriation that "... there were some concerns but the two sides [GOSS and GONU] agreed on ways to expedite the return of South Sudanese IDPs to their homes..." does not seem to hold much water. How realistic is such repatriation before next week's rescheduled census as opposed to the last three years?
The GOSS seem to be bogged down with less important matters [e.g. corruption, nepotism and tribalism] than the things that really matter politically for South Sudan. In that case, the vision of the GOSS is questionable.
4. Khartoum is raising the question of money already spent on preparation for census. But money spent by the GOSS on wrong ways of doing things will always be wasted! That is why political decisions need to be transparent and well debated widely before implementation to avoid backtracking by certain quarters or dissatisfaction by others, resulting in financial wastage.
All the above matters raise the issue of the credibility of the GOSS. They do not seem to do the right thing at the right time. How can the people of South Sudan be entirely confident of the leadership of the GOSS? In three years, it is apparent that the GOSS haven't proven themselves capable!
Clement Juma Mbugoniwia
Leader, USSP
© United South Sudan Party
Friday, 15 February 2008
USSP's Condolences on the Demise of WES Governor H.E. Samuel Abujohn Kabashi
On behalf of the United South Sudan Party (USSP), I wish to convey our deepest sympathy to the immediate family members, relatives and friends on the untimely demise of one of our great leaders and freedom fighters, H.E. Governor Samuel Abujohn Kabashi, Governor of Western Equatoria State. Similarly, we express our condolences to the Government of Southern Sudan, the citizens of South Sudan in general and the citizens of Western Equatoria State in particular.
May the Almighty God console all family members and rest his soul in eternal peace.
In sorrow,
Clement Mbugoniwia
USSP Leader
May the Almighty God console all family members and rest his soul in eternal peace.
In sorrow,
Clement Mbugoniwia
USSP Leader
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
[Fwd] FT: Cowboy capitalists short-change south Sudan's novice rulers
[An outsider's view of the state of affairs in South Sudan]
Cowboy capitalists short-change south Sudan's novice rulers
By Barney Jopson (Published: January 22 2008 02:00 -- © Financial Times)
...
But as entrepreneurs repatriate their quick bucks, the town's [Juba's] economy is stagnating and the process of development has barely started.
The divide between the two does matter because it means south Sudan is not building what it needs: the foundations of a viable state...
Because of inexperience, corruption and the absence of any state apparatus - as well as the international community's decision to focus on Darfur - it has little to show for its efforts. Until three years ago Juba was a garrison town controlled by Khartoum and it remains little more than a super-sized village with barely 1km of paved road...
David Gressly, the deputy resident co-ordinator for the UN, says the town's cowboy capitalism must be tamed: "One of the key challenges ... is to put in place an investment code, together with clear laws on property rights that are enforced by the judiciary."
"Let me reassure you we know what's going on. We've decided to let them [the foreign traders] have a good time until we get the legal system in place," says Barri Wanji, chair of the south Sudan parliament's finance committee.
Cowboy capitalists short-change south Sudan's novice rulers
By Barney Jopson (Published: January 22 2008 02:00 -- © Financial Times)
...
But as entrepreneurs repatriate their quick bucks, the town's [Juba's] economy is stagnating and the process of development has barely started.
The divide between the two does matter because it means south Sudan is not building what it needs: the foundations of a viable state...
Because of inexperience, corruption and the absence of any state apparatus - as well as the international community's decision to focus on Darfur - it has little to show for its efforts. Until three years ago Juba was a garrison town controlled by Khartoum and it remains little more than a super-sized village with barely 1km of paved road...
David Gressly, the deputy resident co-ordinator for the UN, says the town's cowboy capitalism must be tamed: "One of the key challenges ... is to put in place an investment code, together with clear laws on property rights that are enforced by the judiciary."
"Let me reassure you we know what's going on. We've decided to let them [the foreign traders] have a good time until we get the legal system in place," says Barri Wanji, chair of the south Sudan parliament's finance committee.
(link to view complete article © Financial Times)
Monday, 21 January 2008
USSP Public Meeting Held in London, Sat 19th Jan
An interactive USSP public meeting was held in In his speech, Mr Mbugoniwia reiterated the importance and need to form USSP as the only political party that is genuinely articulating the aspirations of the people of
Given that both parties to the CPA (the SPLM and the NCP) have agreed to make the unity of Sudan “the priority of the Parties” and have further agreed to “Design and implement the Peace Agreement so as to make the unity of the Sudan an attractive option especially to the people of South Sudan” (CPA Chapter I Part A: “Agreed Principles” Article 1.1 and Article 1.5.5), USSP believes that any call for an independent South Sudan by the SPLM will undermine its commitment to the CPA as well as its ideology of a “New Sudan”. The claim for making unity attractive as the only option, therefore, does not justify the cause of the long wars that have claimed over 2.5 million lives in more than two decades. USSP thinks that focusing on the one option of making unity attractive, without focusing on the other option of independence, will not address the aspirations of the people of South Sudan who have suffered for so long under a united
As a party, USSP has set the following goals:
1. The security of all citizens and residents and the rule of law are the number one priority.
2. Basic needs for all citizens such as food, clean drinking water, health and affordable housing in order to bring about tangible development.
3. Education that will reflect the needs of
4. Eradication of all forms of regionalism, tribalism, nepotism, corruption and the misuse of power through stringent legislation.
5. Involvement of more women in public affairs and development. Women in our society form the majority of our population; they are the mother of our nation. Giving women a mere 25% share in government and public office is not enough. Women must have equal rights in South Sudanese society as all other human beings.
6. Independence of South Sudan as the ultimate goal and the only alternative to stop the cycle of war and violence that have bedevilled South Sudan for decades.
7. South Sudan’s foreign policy towards its neighbouring states will be to maintain peace and harmony among nations, including
8. The recognition of and the paying of tribute to those generations who sacrificed their lives for the liberation of South Sudan and those whose faces and names may never be known. We owe them the duty to lead our beloved
The following is an excerpt from among the many questions and comments raised by members of the audience:
Question: “South Sudan’s interim constitution and its role in
Comment: “The SPLM/A have all along preached about good ethics and values but have clearly fallen short, and have not practised what they preached, by permitting the malpractices of tribalism, nepotism and corruption to pervade South Sudanese society. The SPLM-led government may not be in power forever, so USSP needs to put pressure on the SPLM to rid itself and
Thursday, 10 January 2008
USSP's Position On The Current Political Developments In South Sudan
As the nation marks the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement three years ago this Wed 9th January, it is important and commendable that both partners to the Agreement -- the SPLM and the NCP -- have now resumed their joint work towards its full implementation. However, it is to be noted that any unilateral actions or decisions by either partner that have a tendency to jeopardise the implementation of all the remaining protocols of the CPA are not in the interest of the people of South Sudan and, therefore, must be rejected. The aspirations of the people of South Sudan for an independent sovereign state, through the 2011 referendum, can only be achieved if the CPA is implemented in its entirety, and its contents fully and clearly explained to the people of South Sudan. Equally important is the role of the international community which remains indispensable to ensure that the Agreement is actually implemented and implemented to the letter to avoid future problems...
Download full printable PDF document:
USSP's Position On The Current Political Developments In South Sudan
Download full printable PDF document:
USSP's Position On The Current Political Developments In South Sudan
Tuesday, 8 January 2008
USSP Cordially Invites All South Sudanese and Friends to Public Meeting in London Sat 19 Jan 2008 from 2 pm
Somers Town Community Centre150 Ossulston Street, Camden
London, NW1 1EE
Download flyer and map...
Please email any comments and/or requests to
usspmail @ gmail.com. Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)