[OPINION] – Grassroots Voices Missing in Multiparty Gamble

By Aggrey Cyrus Kanyikwa

The creation of many political parties in South Sudan is a disguise and calculated gamble. Emerging from a liberation struggle with one political movement and one military force was a great test for South Sudan. Since then, the country has struggled to adapt to a multi party democratic system.

The surge in political parties and movements has grown to challenge the SPLM, driven by an insurrection for control of power and resources but without broad public support. Individuals or small groups form political parties or movements to position themselves for power and resource control, often at the expense of the people.

Many of these groups use military force or disruptive political tactics to gain recognition and influence, regardless of whether their actions benefit the people.

These parties and movements are often created in Juba, in state capitals, or even in foreign cities, without genuine engagement with the communities they claim to represent.

The people, meanwhile, remain deeply attached to the ideology of the liberation struggle, a cause they supported and sacrificed for. They gave their lives, their resources, and their voices to help the SPLM gain local, national, regional and international recognition. The SPLM, in turn, sought the people’s approval before making decisions. Attempts to bypass public involvement failed.

When the SPLM/A prepared for war and sought to mobilise recruits, it first sought the blessing of chiefs, elders, youth, women and religious leaders. Victories were achieved with the endorsement of the people, the true owners of the liberation struggle.

Peace initiatives that excluded the people did not succeed. One example among many was the Abuja Talks between 1988 and 2000.

Learning from such setbacks, and recognising the need for public ownership of the struggle, the SPLM organised:

– The 1994 Chukudum Convention, which introduced a civil administration separating military and civilian roles.

– The 1998 Yambio Economic Conference.

– The 2001 Kejiko I and II Religious Leaders Conferences.

The 1998 Yambio Conference produced the SPLM’s “Truck III Peace Through Development” blueprint, which laid the foundation for the CPA. It identified three pillars for peace in Sudan:

1) Peace negotiations and dialogue.

2) Popular uprising.

3) Armed struggle.

The SPLM then built strong local governance structures (Boma Liberation Councils, Payam Liberation Councils and County Liberation Councils) and strengthened them through County Development Committees. These local bodies mobilised human and financial resources, reviving the struggling SPLM/A and contributing to the CPA’s success. They also mobilised the people to vote in the referendum, which was won.

Today, under the RARCSS, the voices of the people and the role of local government have been silenced. Their functions no longer suit political manoeuvres, creating a widening gap between political leaders and citizens. Politicians now see the people as a burden, separating themselves with self importance and fear of the unknown.

I remind our political leaders, many of whom were nurtured within the SPLM, that the CPA succeeded in part because of the 2004 County Development Committee Consultative and Review Conference in Yambio. Its outcome reinforced the SPLM’s position at the Naivasha negotiations and ensured the voices of South Sudan’s people were heard.

What changed after the referendum? Why do political leaders now undermine the people’s voices, seeking power and resources without their participation?

The conflict that erupted on 15 December 2013 came from a struggle over power and resources. There was a chance for dialogue in 2015 with the signing of the ARCSS, but the people were not consulted. Peace became a purely political process, detached from public input.

The ARCSS collapsed. A “National Dialogue” was launched but its recommendations were ignored. A second dialogue led to the RARCSS,  again without genuine public involvement, and now the RARCSS is near collapse.

Who is to blame?

South Sudan belongs to its people, the ethnic groups, tribes, religious communities, elders, chiefs, rainmakers, youth, women and children. It does not belong to political parties, individuals, or small groups. Excluding the people from their own nation, a nation for which they shed blood, is a grave mistake.

The National Dialogue collected and presented voices from all local councils in South Sudan. Why is it so difficult to respect those voices?

Since 1991, SPLM/A’s efforts to mobilise people and resources only succeeded after the Chukudum Convention (1994), Yambio (1998), Kejiko (2001), the Yambio Review Conference (2004), and the Referendum.

I call on the President, Vice Presidents, Council of Ministers, and National Parliament to honour the voices of the people. Work with Local Government Councils and State Governments to lead the path to peace. The journey to peace is not in the hands of politicians or parties. It lies with the people. Give them back their power and respect their role in managing the nation.

Political elites, rebellions and opposition groups have taken power from the people and used it for their own gain.

There will be no lasting peace unless we reopen the doors to hear the people and restore the National Dialogue. The people have the capacity to resolve the current crisis.

DISCLAIMER

Access Radio® publishes opinion articles as a platform for diverse and independent perspectives. The views expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Access Radio® or its editorial team.

We welcome thoughtful contributions from our listeners and readers. To share your opinion, email news [at] radioyei.org. Submissions may be reviewed before publication