When Insecurity Knocks on the Door, Liberty Flies Through the Window!
"It will need unprecedented will on the part of President Kiir and Riek Machar to reverse this self-propelling tragedy they failed to stop before it began."
Editorial By Jacob J. Akol*
Link to web article here.
When security concerns for the survival of Government and stability of State become the preoccupation of the government of the day and the general population, everything else becomes secondary: Education, health, agriculture, infrastructure, trade, tourism, roads, freedom of expression and the press, along with liberal democracy, transparent governance, justice, control of tribalism, nepotism and corruption; enabling foreign policy and investment – name it – all become victims! And South Sudan is speeding along that disastrous route at the moment. Can it slow down, stop and reverse?
Traditionally in Africa, when a liberation movement achieved independence from a colonial ruler, the prolonged stability of that nation depended very much on the unity within the liberation party and its ability to co-opt or neutralize any potential opposition in the name of “national unity”; often citing the seemingly inevitable tendency of opposition party politics in Africa to evoke tribal loyalties at the ballot box; thus the unpopularity of liberal democracy and the dominance of totalitarian regimes in Africa for the last fifty years of independence.
In most cases, changes in government had come about through military coups and counter-coups. Should we then be surprised at what is happening in South Sudan today, two and a half years after independence? Not at all! In the Gurtong Focus Editorial of August 2013 Issue, I called the second year of independence the “Toughest Transitional Year Yet For SPLM and South Sudan”:
“Since its formation in 1983-1984, there have been four landmark transitions for the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army, SPLM/A/, which have shaped the future of the current South Sudan. The first and the second left behind a trail of bloodshed among South Sudanese before the liberation movement emerged triumphant. The third transition was a near disaster while the fourth went smoothly due to the scare we got from the third transition. The fifth transition is in progress, but how will it end for both the party and the young nation?”
Late on Sunday, December 15 and early Monday December 16, heavy clashes between elements within the SPLA, occurred in the main barracks in the capital, Juba and spread, resulting in the closure of Juba Airport and the declaration of a 6 pm to 6 am curfew in the capital. In an announcement to the press, President Kiir called it an “attempted coup” against his government and announced that a number of people, including his former long-time Vice President Riek Machar, have either been arrested or on the run.
Who was arrested and who on the run we would soon find out for sure; but those associated with Riek in a recent meeting of a SPLM leadership faction, which publicly accused President Kiir of dictatorship and who are now publicly accused by Kiir as responsible for organizing the “attempted coup”, include the suspended SPLM Secretary General Pagan Amum, former Minister of Presidential Affairs Deng Alor, former Minister of Justice John Luk and Madame Nyandeng de Mabior, widow of the late SPLM leader Dr John Garang de Mabior.
Obviously there are a lot more unpleasant revelations yet to emerge from this first “coup attempt” in the new republic; but, whatever the outcome, reconciliation within the rank of the SPLM – and unfortunately SPLA – is now very remote. In the same August editorial posted above, I concluded by asking the question about the fifth transition and supplied an answer and hope:
“Yet, could this very worrying transition have been better managed? Yes, but only in two ways: either Riek shelved his ambitions for a little while longer or President Kiir did the Mandela and promised to ease himself out of power after managing a smooth, democratic and transparent transition within the SPLM and the national elections in 2015. As it is, neither of the two options above is open to us at the moment; so it seems inevitable that we are in for a bruising period of power struggle in this fifth period of transition. One sincerely hopes it will not lead to instability and the dictatorship so many African countries have experienced soon after their independence in the last fifty years.”
That hope now appears dashed by the December events in which blood has been spilled in an open conflict within the national army and accusations and arrests have been made. In the process of continued bloody conflict and prolonged incarceration or trial and punishment of those accused of having planned the coup, fear of retaliation will put the security of the government and nation in the centre of the government’s priorities. Pre-occupation with security issues will inevitably lead the government to rigorously attempt to control the flow of information, making the ministries of Interior (Internal Security) and Information and Broadcasting the corner stone of its activities.
This trend will of course find ready converts in both ministries. Already, every inch of Juba is “security sensitive” for filming and photography, even if one has a permit from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Foreign and local journalists have been accused of “spying”, arrested, their cameras and even mobile telephones confiscated by “the security”. Of late some, editors have been arrested for reporting, specifically the press conference held by Riek Machar and Associates. Their publications have also been seized for even reporting the arrest of their journalists by the security. This will intensify now that there is an open conflict. Exactly how silencing the local press could achieve the desired goal will remain unclear.
However, any crude attempt to control information flow today is a waste of time. One will have to close all the Internet outlets and ban all the mobile phones and satellite-based cameras. The world of Internet knew about the shootings in Juba long before many people in South Sudan had woken up to the fact. Riek, wanted by government, has already partaken of this facility to broadcast to the world his version of the events.
The recent directives from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to re-register all the media houses, regardless of already having a certificate of registration, and all journalists to verify their qualifications and register with the ministry, point to nothing but unlawful attempts to control information flow. The on-going armed conflict will now justify such moves “for security reasons”.
What about the media laws? Even if signed into law tomorrow by the President, they will simply be ignored or remain subject to the whims of security agents and the Ministry of Information. “Human Rights” will become a dirty word.
It will need unprecedented will on the part of President Kiir and Riek Machar to reverse this self-propelling tragedy they failed to stop before it began. If the Nation were more important and powerful than Kiir and Riek, it would put both men on trial, decorate them for their heroic contributions to independence and have them publicly disgraced for activities which have led to needless bloodshed under their watch.
But that, of course, is wishful thinking. Even if Kiir and Riek volunteered to step down from politics for the sake of the nation, their tribal dependants would rather execute them than allow them to bow out gracefully. Kiir has offered more than once to step down and to take no part in the next presidential elections; but reportedly those around him would threaten with “treason” if he dared step down voluntarily.
The momentum towards totalitarianism or dictatorship or even self-destruction, begins with threats of “attempted” or even “successful” coups. And where will failure to reverse the destructive trend leave our foreign policy and direct foreign investment? In tatters! Do we care, really? We should or we will regret it!