South Sudan: Lessons for rabid secessionists RAHEEM OLUWAFUNMINIYI The month of July, 2011 marked a turning point in the history of South Sudan. Not only did it eventually come out of over two and half decades of a bloody civil war in Sudan after intense struggle with its northern neighbour, it also succeeded in becoming the newest independent state in Africa. Like the hopes many African states had in the 60s and 70s of gaining independence from colonial rule, so was that of South Sudan. The hope that self-rule was going to mark the beginning of good things to come for the periphery country and its teeming population quickly ignited a series of nationalist movements and bred leaders who not only sabotaged the continued efforts of the colonial overlords to keep holding forth their respective colonies but put wilful pressure on colonial structures which led, first, to decolonisation and ultimately, independence. It was hoped that at the turn of independence, self-rule would transform the continent into one filled with socio-economic development, credible democracy and a total commitment to the upliftment of the people. This however failed to yield any meaningful result. Hopes of a brighter tomorrow were soon shattered as gloom set in. The Congo became the first casualty while more than half of all African countries which had newly gained their independence went either into a civil war or found themselves overthrown by blood-thirsty and gun-wielding military men. Africa since then had known no peace. It was in the light of this, amidst the decade-long sufferings South Sudan had faced over time, that it was thought a separate country was needed to be carved out to give the people a new lease of life. Anyone who had lived in Sudan in the last three decades and knew well the historical evolution of that part of the former Sudan would agree that its people had suffered a great deal in the hands of its northern neighbours, such that the only solution to a lasting peace was to grant that part of the country swift independence. However, no one would have envisaged that two years into South Sudan’s independence, it would fall into crisis which appears to threaten its very foundations. As a landlocked country, South Sudan is among the world’s most impoverished countries with less than one per cent of its population having access to electricity. Despite being the third largest oil exporter in sub-Saharan Africa after Nigeria and Angola, the new nation is not only awash with guns after a long battle with Khartoum, but has been grappling with corruption and lawlessness since independence. The current crisis in South Sudan is perceived to have both ethnic and political dimensions. The current president, Salva Kiir, is from the Dinka ethnic group, the country’s largest, while his main rival and former Vice President, Riek Machar, belongs to the Nuer ethnic group, the country’s second largest. This ethnic rivalry forms part of the current crisis bedevilling the country with each group systematically killing each other in their respective places of domicile. The political angle to the crisis which has seen tension rise between Kiir and Machar since July, 2013 stems from the latter’s intention to win the leadership of the ruling party ahead of presidential election in 2015. This quickly led to his sacking by Kiir and his cabinet. The political tension soon snowballed when Kiir accused Machar of attempting a coup on December 15, a situation which saw the arrest of opposition figures and former cabinet members. Apart from the fact that the crisis has left hundreds dead, the number of people displaced as a result of the crisis has tripled to about 81,000 with the number increasing by the day. Also, the United Nations has asked for another 5,500 troops from other UN Missions in Africa to complement the 7,000 already deployed across the country. It is saddening that the African continent has failed to learn from history and has been therefore consumed by its lack of it. When other countries of the world are seeking ways to better the lot of its people and move their countries towards growth and development, African countries wallow in ethnic and political rivalries. It is disheartening to find a country that had come out of a long period of turmoil engaging in the same crisis that gave them life support. It is only hoped things will return to normalcy soon. With the entire crisis bedevilling many African states today, no country has been able to hold its head up high than the Nigerian state in terms of managing conflicts and civil disobedience in all guises. Since the 1967 civil war, Nigeria has been in a state of conflict. There have been over a very long time talks about Nigeria’s disintegration. The most saddening part of it came from a United States agency report which noted, like a prophet of doom, that Nigeria could seize to exist by 2015. Locally, a lot of rabble-rousing and threatening voices have sprung up, especially in the Niger Delta region where predictions of a possible breakup of Nigeria could take place if their ‘son’ is denied a second term in office. The country is not new to such threats of disintegration. For those who are historically conscious, both the Northern and Western regions had at some point called for secession. It would only take the audacity of the late Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu to make good such threats which of course failed in its entirety to solve the Nigerian Question. This open call for secession or outright appeal for disintegration has continued unabated and the loud tones could still be heard across the country. With the current political imbroglio brewing among the political elite, it remains to be seen what 2015 will look like. However, despite these seeming problems, this writer believes secession or threats of disintegration are not the decisive solution we need both as a people and country. The event in South Sudan in particular should serve as a lesson for those who think dividing Nigeria on either religious or ethnic lines would solve all the problems we face as a people. We are a people with so much anger and are wont to unleash it at the slightest provocation. Our nature is very unpredictable and unstable such that we do not have a collective consciousness that drives nationalism, patriotism and love for even our neighbour. The fact that our thinking has been streamlined over time to pursue personal aggrandisement makes nonsense of whatever lesson the Good Samaritan story portrays. As the crisis in South Sudan continues, the lesson Nigerians must learn therefore, is that disunity breeds nothing but further bloodshed. Those who call for division do not understand the pains and horror of war and think it is going to take a smooth transmission. Events in South Sudan paint this sad picture of a path we must not be willing to follow. The political elite must realise that the Nigerian state may not be able to hold itself for long if the massive disconnect between the rulers and ruled continues.
Posted on: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 05:24:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015