Thank You Luke Kuth Dak

Dear Luk Kuth,

Greetings from South Sudan citizens especially my colleagues whom we read your article together, we all got relieved and strengthened to have such a voiceful gentleman like you! It is a previledge to read your tribal non-tolerent message to entire world not only South Sudanese. As some of you might have read and understood the reasons of several rebellions(rebolts) in south Sudan, these are all tribal influences and leadership competitions of some individuals across the new nation.

Underscoring lack of education and civilization across Africa and particularly Junub Al Sudan, majority turn in to be betrayers of their soil they fought for, so that they survive on, to make matter worse, majority with little education are pretending to be advocating for the liberation of the south yet they had been hiding in khartoum clapping hands to arabs who by then called southerners “Jungle dogs”.

I feel proud when I find such freedom fighters like you and could simply wish such a people blessings so that they can campaign for tribal differences and unify the south Sudan under one theme” Junubin”

I personally watched several interviews conducted between Khartoum and this idiot who call himself to be a professor David de Chand where he always condemns leadership in south Sudan and termed our country as a “failed nation” which does not have a destination! ” he has no objectives in his manifesto! he is just a tribalist who pretends to be caring for one tribe in South Sudan which he turned against during our arm-struggle with Khartoum.

He was enjoying millions pounds for betraying southerners in Khartoum and US where he was sent to for further studies.He does not have back-ups though he disgraces his own people just because of money!

We highly ranked you for such rightful condemnation for these idiots who are trying to confuse our citizens for tribal influences across our new nation
We are all junubin, no body is better than anybody nor a tribe better than any tribe as well as religion within south sudan

Abraham Agoth
South Sudan,

the writer can be reached at;agoth.abraham@yahoo.com/abrahamagoth@gmail.com

In Mading Aweil, South Sudan

Abyei and Panthou (Heglig): Clarifying the deliberate confusion

By Luka Biong Deng

April 26, 2012 — There have been a number of concerning statements in the press, in reports from NGOs and third parties, including from Member States of the United Nations and African Union, that Heglig (known as Panthou by most South Sudanese) is an area lying within the territory of the Republic of Sudan. The Republic of South Sudan (South Sudan) was also surprised to hear that so many members of the international community were unaware that South Sudan has claimed this area as its own and consistently included it as one of the disputed areas requiring peaceful settlement with Sudan. This confusion over Panthou also prevails among the people of South Sudan and surprisingly among their leaders. I was particularly shocked by a statement made by a senior member of our government in a high level informal gathering that Heglig has been compromised by the final award of the Abyei Arbitration Tribunal. As I tried to clarify to him certain facts about the ruling of Abyei Arbitration, this senior official kept insisting on his conviction and the more he was arguing the more he was exposing his ignorance about the issue. I came to know that if it could take me such effort to convince a senior official about Heglig, there also must be a knowledge gap for others further away from the talks between the two States.

As the Co-agent of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement together with the Vice President Dr. Riek Machar to the Abyei Boundaries Arbitration Tribunal and a member of the SPLM team for post-referendum negotiation and designated to oversee the work of the Technical Ad-hoc Border committee (often called the “North-South Border Committee”), I would like to clarify the confusion over Panthou (Heglig) and the final award of the Abyei Arbitration Tribunal and the claim of the South Sudan over Panthou. Immediately after the announcement of the final award of the Abyei Arbitration Tribunal on 22nd July 2009, I made statement on the following day in Elsahafa newspaper that the award did not resolve the North-South border and based on the evidence available I said that Heglig remains to be part of Unity State. When I tried to retrieve this statement from the electronic archive of Elshafa newspaper for this article, the access to this statement was specifically denied and restricted by the Sudan national security but I managed to get a hard copy of the newspaper. This tells more about how the regime in Khartoum would like to conceal facts from the public over Heglig.

Despite claims to the contrary, Heglig was absolutely not determined to be part of Sudan (the North) by the July 2009 ruling of the Abyei Arbitration Tribunal (referred by many in South Sudan as the Permanent Court of Arbitration decision (PCA decision). The parties signed an Abyei Arbitration Agreement in 2008 which clearly provided that the mandate of the arbitration tribunal was simply to determine if the Abyei Boundaries Commission (ABC) exceeded its mandate and if it did, to then “define (i.e. delimit) on map the boundaries of the area of the nine

Ngok Dinka chiefdoms transferred to Kordofan in 1905.” (see http://www.pca-cpa.org/upload/files/Abyei%20Arbitration %20Agreement.pdf). This is what the tribunal did. As a result, the PCA decision only defined the border limits of the Abyei Area. The tribunal issued no opinion with respect to the political status or location of Heglig or any other area in Sudan or now South Sudan. Indeed, in the entire 286 pages of the PCA decision, the tribunal mentions Heglig only once and that was simply to describe the Ngok Dinka’s assertion that there were permanent settlements and agricultural areas in Heglig back in 1905. (see http://www.pca-cpa.org/upload/files/ Abyei%20Final%20Award.pdf).

In particular, the Tribunal rules that the ABC Experts were not in excess of mandate regarding their decision over the southern boundary of the Abyei Area. The final and binding decision of ABC states that the Southern Boundary shall be the Kordofan-Bahr el-Ghazal-Upper Nile boundary as it was defined on 1st January 1956. As a result, arguing that the PCA decision determined the status of Heglig has as much validity as arguing that it also determined the political status and location of Juba or El Obeid — simply because neither of those cities were found to be within the Abyei Area.

Regarding South Sudan’s claim on Heglig, this is not a new assertion of South Sudan. For years now South Sudan has consistently and openly claimed Heglig as part of its territory, including (i) in the context of the Technical Ad-hoc border Committee established by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), (ii) after the issuance of the PCA decision, and (iii) within the context of the negotiations with the Government of Sudan as facilitated by the African Union High Level Implementation Panel (AUHIP).

During the deliberations of the Technical Ad-hoc border Committee the South Sudanese delegation consistently raised its claims to Heglig, albeit the Government of Sudan refused to acknowledge those claims. The disputing claims over the area were well known and the difference of opinions on Heglig were evidenced, for example, in the October 24, 2010 joint letter of the Chairman and the Deputy Chairman of the technical committee outlining the “Views of the Parties on the Disputed Areas.” This letter was written and presented to the Joint Political Committee (of the National Congress Party and Sudan People’s Liberation Movement). In the document, the NCP’s Chairman, Professor Adallah Sadiq, listed four disputed areas and the Deputy Chair, Riek DeGaol Juer, then presented (8) disputed areas which included what was referred to as the ’South Kordofan/Unity state sector (Heglig). Furthermore, immediately after the PCA decision was released Vice President Riak stated that Heglig’s final status would need to be determined by the Technical Ad-hoc Border Committee established by the CPA. For instance, as reported by the Sudan Tribune on July 27, 2009, the Vice President stated that Heglig was not part of the ruling in the Hague, but “It will be resolved in the North-South border demarcation process.” (see http://www.sudantribune.com/There-a…).

Additionally, the Government of Southern Sudan prior to secession and the Government of South Sudan post-secession, repeatedly asserted in the context of the AUHIP-facilitated negotiations with the Government of Sudan claiming Heglig as belonging to South Sudan and therefore placing it on the list of “disputed areas” requiring further settlement. For instance, on June 28, 2011 and in November 2011, SPLM/GoSS and South Sudan respectively submitted a clear written proposal stating “The six (6) disputed areas are: (i) Wanthou (Joda); (ii) Maganis; (iii) Kaka; (iv) Northern Bahr el Ghazal; (v) Kaffia Kanje and Hofrat el Nahas; and (vi) Panthou (Heglig)”. South Sudan tabled similar language during the February 2012 round of negotiations, and reaffirmed this position in its oral and written submissions made during the March 2012 negotiations. Indeed, the failure of the parties to agree on the list of disputed areas (including Heglig) and to agree on the mechanism for settlement —with the South proposing international arbitration, is the primary reason an agreement addressing the disputed border areas was never even initialed in March 2012.

What is indisputable is that South Sudan claims Heglig as theirs and Sudan claims it as theirs. The fact that Sudan has refused to “agree” that it is disputed —both in the context of the Technical Ad-hoc Border Committee and in the Addis negotiations— does not make it any less a disputed area. Those who would refuse to support the submission of Heglig to a peaceful dispute resolution mechanisms because it is not an “agreed disputed area” are playing a dangerous game by leaving a critical matter unresolved between the parties which can result in continued hostilities. The purpose of the negotiations is to address such matters, not leave them to foment distrust and violence in the future.

In closing, as shown from the above, the PCA decision did not decide the final status of the Heglig area and South Sudan’s claim over the area and its status therefore as a disputed area as between the two States is not a new claim, but rather one that has been consistently made for several years and witnessed by the AUHIP and other observers to the Addis negotiations.

Luka Biong Deng is a senior member of South Sudan’s ruling SPLM.

http://www.sudantribune.com/Abyei-and-Panthou-Heglig,42430

Important Documents on Abyei

The Abyei Protocol Demystified.docx

The road back to abyei.pdf

Status of Heglig.pdf

Abyei Hague Report.pdf

FPC Briefing- Abyei- Beyond expediency, towards sustainable peace.pdf

Abyei- From a Shared Past to a Contested Future.pdf

why abyei matters.pdf

Abey_boundary_com_report-1.pdf

Abey_boundary_com_report-2.pdf

How to Defuse Sudan Conflict

Interviewee: Jendayi Frazer, Adjunct Senior Fellow for Africa Studies

Interviewer: Christopher Alessi, Associate Staff Writer
April 26, 2012

Tensions along the oil-rich border that divides Sudan and recently independent South Sudan have escalated in recent weeks, raising the prospect of a full-scale war between the longtime foes. China, which maintains considerable oil interests in both countries, has called for restraint (Reuters) and vowed to work with the United States to bring both sides back to the negotiating table. Jendayi Frazer, the former U.S. assistant secretary of state for African affairs, says while the role of mediation should remain with the African Union, the United States and China are vital players in this conflict that can bring pressure to bear on both parties. However, Frazer says it is “a strategic mistake and it has never worked” for the international community to treat both sides equally, since the northern Sudan is clearly the aggressor in this latest conflict as well as many of those in the past. “The international community should be united against northern aggression,” she says.

Can you give an overview of the history of the sectarian conflict between the people who live in what is now the South Sudan and those in the northern state of Sudan, and how that led ultimately to the South’s secession from Sudan in July 2011?

The conflict goes back to more than fifty years, but the last twenty years has been the war between the north and the south–the Sudan People’s Liberation Army and the Khartoum government of President Bashir. That conflict over the last twenty years has led to the deaths of more than two million people, and wasn’t ended really until the comprehensive peace agreement of 2005, which allowed for the South to go to secession.

The roots of the conflict over the past fifty years and the intensification over the last twenty years was very much about how the north marginalizes the other regions, whether it is the south, whether it is east, or Darfur in the west. There’s a small group in the center, who are a part of the government, who have marginalized the other regions and basically used them for resource extraction–that led to several rebellions.

Is there an ethnic component to that?

It’s ethnic, it’s racial, it’s religious. There’s a religious difference between the north, which is largely Muslim, and the South, which is largely Christian. And then between the north and South, there is a view that there is an Arab north and a black African South. If you go to the north, and you find Arabs, you wouldn’t know that that they weren’t Africans. So that sort of racial difference is really quite mixed.

This dispute is really over borders, over oil, over many of the issues that were not finalized before secession.

In terms of the conflict right now that has pushed Sudan and South Sudan to the brink of war, can you sum up the main issues and what is at stake?

The primary issue is about oil, and then about the demarcation of the border between north and South–and the oil fields are located along that border area. As long as that border has not been demarcated, then there are claims on both sides that the oil fields belong to them. This is particularly intense around the town of Abyei, which it’s not clear whether that belongs to the north or whether that belongs to the South. Then there has been recent fighting in the town of Heglig [which the South occupied for ten days until reportedly withdrawing last week], which is a part of South Kordofan [a state in Sudan] and appears to be in the north, but the South claims that it is actually a part of the southern state of Warrap.

Is there an “aggressor,” or are both parties equally culpable in this conflict?

I don’t think both parties are culpable, and that’s where the international community got it wrong last week when they universally condemned South Sudan for going into Heglig. This dispute is really over borders, over oil, over many of the issues that were not finalized before secession. The tension has been rising since the beginning of the year, in which you would have had the north bombing areas in South Kordofan, in Blue Nile–basically bombing the SPLA North [South Sudanese-affiliated rebel forces operating in Sudan]–and continuing to fight with rebels in Darfur.

The north has continued to be an aggressor for months before this particular conflict over Heglig came up. Yet the international community’s condemnation of the north couldn’t be heard at all. And so this heavy unified condemnation of the South for going into Heglig seemed to me to be overkill, and in fact, it created a cover for further northern aggression–which is what we are seeing right now with the bombing into Unity state. These aerial bombardments and killing of civilians have been going on constantly. This is the north killing [its] own people–the Southerners of the northern state–and now going into South Sudan and bombing. So there’s a very clear aggressor here and it is northern Sudan, continuing to do what it’s always done, which is bomb and kill civilians.

The international community–the position of the United States–is going to try to be the arbitrator and treat each one equally; it is a strategic mistake, and it has never worked. In the past, the United States has been very clear that the north has been the aggressor, and the South has been our ally and our partner–and we need to treat them as such. It’s all well and good for the African Union to come in as a neutral arbitrator. In the signing of the comprehensive peace agreement, Kenya was a neutral mediator; the United States was not the mediator and should never be the mediator because we are clearly on one side of the conflict.

What’s China’s role in all of this? As a long-time ally of Khartoum, but also a large purchaser of oil from South Sudan, can it play a mediating role?

No, it shouldn’t be a mediator–no more than the United States should. The mediation should stay within the African Union. But China and the United States are two of the most important players here, from the point of view that they can bring pressure to bear on both parties. They can bring coercive pressure–i.e, sticks, sanctions–and they can also bring incentives to bear. They could bring the goods that would actually deliver parties to the mediator. So China has an essential role to play, as does the United States. And the United States and China working hand in hand is even better.

What’s the role of the larger international community, including the United Nations?

The UN is involved from the point of view of having peacekeepers on the ground. The UN’s role is very important. But it was a mistake for Ban Ki-moon, the United States, and the AU to come out so hard against South Sudan for just an incursion into Heglig. It just created the context in which the Sudanese are now bombing Unity state. The UN role is primarily to protect the civilian population–from the point of view of keeping their peacekeepers there, as well as providing humanitarian assistance to those people that are now displaced and fleeing from these bombing attacks from the north. The international community should be united against northern aggression.

The fights on the ground are part of the negotiation that’s taking place. Sometimes when you can’t get a decision at the negotiating table, you go back to some incursions, some fights to shore up your position.

How has South Sudan’s decision to shut down oil production in January affected the economies of both South Sudan and Sudan?

It’s probably hurting South Sudan more than it is hurting the north, but it’s hurting both of them. The South is playing a very high-stakes brinksmanship type of policy vis-a-vis the north to try to force decisions. The South is trying to force the issue [of being able to reap the rewards of its own oil production, which must be transported through Sudan’s infrastructure to be exported] by shutting off the oil, but it’s a high-stakes game, and that has probably led even more to this type of armed conflict, these incursions. The environment is that much more tense because of that decision and because of the economic impact. It’s not just hurting the north and the South, it’s also hurting China. It’s hurting the countries that have oil concessions there and have been pumping oil out of Sudan. So China has a lot at stake in trying to resolve this.

What are some of the plausible outcomes to this conflict? Do you think both parties will get back to the negotiating table?

The fights on the ground are part of the negotiation that’s taking place. Sometimes when you can’t get a decision at the negotiating table, you go back to some incursions, some fighting to shore up your position. Basically, if you can take some advances on the ground, you can shore up your position at the negotiating table. So I think this is all part of negotiating. The problem is it can get out of hand and create its own dynamic, which leads back to full-scale war. But I don’t expect full-scale war. I do believe that the negotiations will continue.

The ultimate goal here–the South needs to take a strategic pause in terms of fighting the north on the ground. They need to focus on a future that’s more eastern looking, i.e., connect themselves to the East African Community. Most of the traders who are in South Sudan right now are coming from east Africa. So their economic future and political future should be looking south and east, rather than looking north.

So they need to, over time, disentangle themselves from the north. In order to do that, they need to not be in a full-scale war or these types of episodic conflicts or fights with the north. It’s not that they acquiesce to the northern decisions, but they need to look beyond the day-to-day and look toward the future. The only way to disentangle themselves from the north is at the negotiating table, and on the ground have that strategic pause, and do the compromises necessary to get out of the relationship. But also as part of that, the United States needs to provide aerial defense for the South. The north is constantly bombing civilians, and the South cannot defend itself. We need to adopt a posture that says to the north, “If you mess with the South, you mess with the United States.” We need to give them a security blanket, and a part of that would be helping them with an air defense system.

http://www.cfr.org/africa/defuse-sudan-conflict/p28072#cid=soc-facebook-at-interview-how_to_defuse_sudan_conflict-042612

One of Sudan’s ‘lost boys’ finds home with Army after living for years as a refugee

Sgt. Peter Kuch is with the 782nd Brigade Support Battalion, 4th Brigade Combat Team.

By Drew Brooks
Staff writer

FORWARD OPERATING BASE PASAB, Afghanistan – War shattered Peter Kuch’s family and forced him to grow up in the appalling poverty of refugee camps.

But he is willing to face another war – this time as a soldier serving the country that saved him.

Kuch is a 33-year-old sergeant in the 82nd Airborne Division. He’s on his first deployment, serving with the 782nd Brigade Support Battalion at Forward Operating Base Pasab in Afghanistan.

He learned about war 25 years ago.

That was when the sound of guns shook him from sleep in the middle of the night. His village in southern Sudan was under attack.

Kuch and his parents ran away, but they were separated in the chaos. That was the last time he saw them.

Kuch became one of the thousands of orphaned children of the Sudanese civil war – soon to be known to the world as the Lost Boys of Sudan. He joined thousands of boys like himself who trekked through war, disease and hunger to get to refugee camps. Uncounted numbers did not survive.

When Kuch ran away from his village, he found himself with a few cousins his age. They joined up with a larger group of refugees who walked for 28 days to Ethiopia.

“We couldn’t go back home,” Kuch said. “Our villages were completely burned down.”

Ethiopia provided an escape from the immediate danger of the war, but it was no haven.

Kuch had lost his family. At night, he dreamed of the attack on his village and cried.

“I was scared,” he said.

And, he said, “it wasn’t only me.”

Thousands of Sudanese refugees were crowded along the Ethiopian border in squalid conditions. Many, like Kuch, had been orphaned by the fighting.

Then, war erupted in Ethiopia, and refugee camps were attacked.

Kuch and the other Lost Boys were back in Sudan. But their homes were gone.

The same armies that had destroyed villages four years earlier now attacked the columns of refugees.

“In the day, we hid,” Kuch said. “When night came, we walked. Six to eight months and we walked all that time.”

The survivors made it to Kenya. That’s where Kuch would spend the next 10 years of his life.

And that’s where his salvation began.

In Kenya, United Nations workers helped Kuch get into a boarding school where he learned English. He also met his future wife, Evelynne, in the camp.

Even though life was better, Kuch had little reason to hope for a brighter future.

“There was never enough food; poor medical treatment,” he said. “We never knew what would happen tomorrow.”

It was not until he learned that the United Nations was working with the United States to take 4,500 of the Lost Boys to America that Kuch began to dream that his life had possibilities.

He applied to be part of the program. He went through a series of interviews and background checks. He waited.

Then he learned that he had been chosen.

“I was lucky,” he said.

Kuch arrived in America in the summer of 2001.

Just weeks later, he watched as the horrors of the 9/11 attacks unfolded on television.

“My country was at war for decades,” Kuch said. “And now war had followed me. I was heartbroken. I was so mad.”

Kuch wanted to join the Army then, but he wasn’t eligible.

He could, however, begin to build a life in his adopted home.

He lived in upstate New York, where he saw snow for the first time. He was able to go to college, studying hard between two jobs.

In 2003, Kuch learned that his parents were alive and living with other family members in what is now South Sudan. He has never been able to go back to see them, but he has been sending money to support them for years.

Six years after arriving in America, Kuch was working for a market research company. He and a friend talked about joining the military.

“It was a joke at first,” Kuch said. “Then I thought ‘That’s not a bad idea.’ ”

Kuch said he saw joining the Army as a way to pay back the country that had both rescued him and helped bring stability to his homeland.

“Sudan’s was a war that I thought would never end,” he said. “Peace came to Sudan and South Sudan because of America. I might not make a difference, but I thought serving would be giving back on behalf of myself and thousands of Sudanese.”

Kuch joined the Army in 2008. A year later, in a ceremony at Fort Bragg, he became a U.S. citizen.

“It was a big day for me,” he said. “This is a great country.”

Kuch said the horrors of his years as a refugee don’t haunt him any more.

He and Evelynne have started their American family, welcoming a son a little over a year ago.

In June, he will have served in the Army for four years.

And the deployment to Kandahar province in Afghanistan has brought his experiences with war full circle.

“I have been through a lot,” Kuch said. “I was eager to go. This is the reason I joined the military.”

The former Lost Boy has found his place – paying his debt of service to the country that gave him a home.

http://www.fayobserver.com/articles/2012/04/29/1173155

Sudan Declares Emergency On Border With South

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

KHARTOUM, Sudan April 29, 2012

KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) — Sudan declared a state of emergency Sunday in areas bordering South Sudan, giving authorities wide powers of arrest a day after they detained three foreigners in a flashpoint town along the frontier.

The detentions and state of emergency heightened tensions even further along border between the old rivals, who in the past month came to the brink of an all-out war because of renewed fighting in disputed areas.

Sudanese officials have accused South Sudan of using foreigner fighters during its assault on the oil-rich Heglig region, which Sudan claims. Southern Sudanese troops briefly captured the area, amid rising international concerns of an escalation in the fighting between the two countries.

Sudanese army spokesman Col. Sawarmy Khaled claimed on state television late Saturday that four people arrested in the Heglig region, including a Briton, a Norwegian, a South African and a South Sudanese, had military backgrounds. He alleged they were carrying out military activities in Heglig, but did not elaborate. Khaled said the arrests prove its government claims that South Sudan uses foreign fighters.

But a representative for one of the three said Sunday that they were on a humanitarian mine-clearing mission.

South Sudan split from Sudan in July last year , but the two countries have yet to agree on border demarcation and divvying up oil revenues and resources.

South Sudan invaded Heglig earlier this month, saying it belonged to the south. Sudan later retook the town; Sudanese forces say they pushed out the South Sudanese while South Sudan says its troops pulled out to avoid an all-out war. Sudan elevated the tension even further by bombing South Sudan.

In Oslo, a Norwegian humanitarian organization said Sunday that one of its employees, 50-year-old John Soerboe, was detained while on a five-day mine-clearing mission in southern Sudan with the Briton and South African.

The group denied he was on a military mission and said he had been working for more than seven years to clear the region of mines.

The Norwegian People’s Aid organization called Soerboe “one of our most experienced aid workers.” Per Nergaard, the group’s head of emergency preparedness, said Soerboe used to be in the Norwegian military years ago before turning to humanitarian work. He had been working in southern Sudan since 2005.

He said in a statement on the group’s website that Soerboe was on a “routine” mission, with the representatives from South Sudan and U.N. anti-mine organizations, in a region that borders Sudan.

Nergaard did not know the names of the others arrested, or have details about the incident. They were taken by Sudanese authorities to Khartoum, he said.

“The circumstance surrounding their arrest and exact location at the time is yet unclear,” he said.

“Our main priority now is to ensure that Soerboe and his colleagues are safe and to assure their rapid release. We are working closely with the Norwegian Foreign Ministry and our U.N. partners to assure this,” Nergaard said.

The Norwegian organization has been working in the area since 1986, he added.

A spokesman for the Norwegian Foreign Ministry, Frode O. Andersen, said Oslo “had demanded access to the Norwegian citizen.”

“We have asked for a clarification on why he was arrested, and we want to find out the charges against him,” Andersen said.

Britain’s Foreign Office confirmed a British national had been detained and said it was “urgently investigating” the details of the arrests. The ministry said it had requested immediate access to the Briton, but had no other details.

The South African Foreign Ministry said Sunday it is following up on reports of the arrest of a South African man in a mine clearing detail near the South Sudan border.

Associated Press writers Jan M. Olsen in Copenhagen, Denmark, David Stringer in London, and Angus Shaw in Harare, Zimbabwe contributed to this report.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=151641535

Sudan Declares Emergency On Border With South NPR by AP KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) — Sudan declared a state of emergency Sunday in areas borderingSouth Sudan, giving authorities wide powers of arrest a day after they detained three foreigners in a flashpoint town along the frontier.

South Sudan says 21 dead in clash with Sudanese-backed militia Reuters Africa JUBA (Reuters) – South Sudan, embroiled in a border dispute with its northern neighbour Sudan, said on Sunday at least 21 people died in two days of clashes between the South’s army and Khartoum-backed rebels in the South’s oil-producing Upper Nile …

State Of Emergency Raises The Stakes In Sudan Capital Public Radio News By Melisa Goh Sudan has declared a state of emergency as tensions mount along the disputed border it shares with its new neighbor, South Sudan. Are the two nations headed for war? Sudan has declared a state of emergency as tensions mount along the …

Sudan says detained foreigners have military ties NewsOK.com KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) — Sudan has claimed three foreigners arrested in a disputed area on the border with South Sudan had military hardware and an armored vehicle. But a representative for one of the three said Sunday that they were on a humanitarian …

Fresh Attacks On Juba’s Troops AllAfrica.com By Arne Doornebal, 29 April 2012 Panakuac — Fresh fighting has broken out on Sunday at the frontline between the armies of Sudan and South Sudan. Just when an RNW correspondent visitedSouth Sudanese troops at their positions at Panakuac, …

Juba Official Calls for Removal of Mbeki From Mediation Process AllAfrica.com Juba — South Sudanese officials and senior figures of the ruling party in Juba on Saturday added to calls for the removal of Thabo Mbeki, the chair of the African Union High Implementation Panel which has been mediating conflict resolution talks …

In Sudan and South Sudan, questions of nationality Reuters He was born in the southern part of Sudan but has lived in the north for more than three decades. When South Sudan broke away as an independent country from Sudan in July, Kwaje was left on the northern side of the border, a foreigner.

South African UN worker held in Sudan Times LIVE A South Sudan soldier walks at a ruptured oil well in South Sudan’s Unity State.South Sudan has been embroiled in cross-border violence with Sudan that the UN says is threatening world peace. Within 24hours of a South African being killed in Somalia …

Sudan declares state of emergency in border areas WTOP President Salva Kiir, centre, arrives at the John Garang Masoleum in Juba, Sudan, Friday, April 27, 2012, as he is welcomed back to the country by his supporters after an official visit to China. South Sudan and Sudan have clashed for the past three …

China offers South Sudan $8 bln in development funds Reuters JUBA, April 28 (Reuters) – China has offered South Sudan $8 billion in development funds for road, hydropower, infrastructure and agriculture projects, South Sudan’s information minister told Reuters on Saturday. The loan came after South Sudan …

Sudan army captures four foreigners ABC Online “This confirms what we said before, that South Sudan in its aggression against Heglig was supported by foreign experts,” he said. But Jan Ledang, country director for the Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA) mission in South Sudan, says they were not in the …

SOUTH SUDAN DENIES ACCUSATIONS THAT FOREIGNERS Chicago Tribune SOUTH SUDAN DENIES ACCUSATIONS THAT FOREIGNERS ARRESTED BY KHARTOUM WERE AIDING SOUTH SUDAN ARMY.

SOUTH SUDAN ARMY SAYS UN TRUCK GOT LOST IN Chicago Tribune SOUTH SUDAN ARMY SAYS UN TRUCK GOT LOST IN BORDER AREA AND WAS STOPPED BY SUDANESE ARMY.

Political Tensions Mount Between Sudans NPR Hostilities have grown increasingly violent between Sudan and South Sudan over border issues and oil wealth. Host Scott Simon talks with NPR’s Ofeibea Quist-Arcton about the latest on the conflict. This is WEEKEND EDITION from NPR News.

Fleeing violence, Sudanese make homes amid rocks msnbc.com (blog) A couple stands in front of their shelter in Bram village in the Nuba Mountains in SouthKordofan, Sudan, April 28. Fleeing aerial bombardment by the Sudanese air force thousands of people have abandoned their homes and made make-shift shelters between …

South Sudan`s application to join EAC delayed to November IPPmedia East African Community (EAC) heads of state on Saturday directed the Council of Ministers to come up with a verification report by November, this year, regarding an admission request of South Sudan to join the five-nation regional bloc.

Kiir says China to loan South Sudan $8 million Sudan Tribune April 28,2012 (JUBA) – South Sudan’s president Salva Kiir has described his recent visit to China as “positive” and said China has agreed to loan South Sudan US$8 billion for infrastructure development. Speaking at a press briefing on Saturday, …

Sudan defends use of air strikes in South Sudan conflict Reuters KHARTOUM (Reuters) – Sudan’s ambassador to the United Nations has defended his country’s right to use air strikes against South Sudanese troops who Khartoum says are inside Sudanese territory. Dafallah ElHaj Ali Osman, however, stopped short of saying …

South Sudan says to withdraw all police from Abyei Reuters JUBA (Reuters) – South Sudan has told the United Nations it plans to withdraw all its police personnel from the disputed Abyei region, according to a letter from the country’s permanent mission to the world body. The decision was taken at a cabinet …

Insecurity threatens South Sudan EAC bid The Citizen Daily They said recurrent conflict between Sudan and South Sudan should not be tolerated because of its potential dire consequences to the wider eastern Africa. “The return to war in Sudan is a matter of deep concern. We appeal to the warring parties to …

South Sudan says to withdraw police from Abyei Reuters AlertNet JUBA, April 29 (Reuters) – South Sudan has told the United Nations it would withdraw all its police from the disputed Abyei region, according to a letter from the country’s mission to the world body.South Sudan, embroiled in more than three weeks of …

SOUTH SUDAN SAYS TO WITHDRAW ALL POLICE PERSONNEL Chicago Tribune SOUTH SUDAN SAYS TO WITHDRAW ALL POLICE PERSONNEL FROM DISPUTED ABYEI REGION-LETTER TO UN SECURITY COUNCIL.

South Sudan says to quit border zone, seeks end to clashes Reuters By Yara Bayoumy | JUBA (Reuters) – South Sudan has told the United Nations it will pull all police out of a disputed region bordering Sudan and is committed to halting all fighting with its northern neighbor, but Khartoum declared a state of emergency …

Sudan president declares state of emergency along southern border KTBS The president of Sudan declared a state of emergency Sunday for cities along the hotly contested border with South Sudan, where Sudanese fighter jets launched at least one attack against their neighbor’s ground forces. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir …

SOUTH SUDAN SAYS COMMITTED TO “IMMEDIATE CESSATION Chicago Tribune SOUTH SUDAN SAYS COMMITTED TO “IMMEDIATE CESSATION OF ALL HOSTILITIES” WITH SUDAN-LETTER TO UN.

One System One Code

By Ajang Aguer

Not sure what time it is! No clock to tell the time. No shadow to follow, either. Everything appears devoid of physical features. In the sky, the sun seems to have stood still! In front of me is a wall-a shimmering but translucent wall. I can see what is on the other side of the wall, but can’t really fathom the details. Is this an illusion? I blink my eyes in quick succession. But the wall is still there! I scream out aloud, but the wall swallows the sound in indiscrete fashion.

So I touch it. But the feel that I receive is delusional. The wall is so sleek and comfortable to the touch that I somehow forget that it even exists. Maybe this wall is not real. My impulses try to resist. The whim is almost intolerable that the no-time-feel good sweeps my brain, and somehow synchronizes the feeling into “I don’t care” kind of despair.

I take in a deep breathe. I gaze left-right, and back-front. For a slim moment, the universe around me appears hallow and lifeless. But in front of me-on the other side of the wall-I can see an operating system. I want to be part of the system. I want to be on the other side of the wall and become an integral member of this membranous wall! On one ambitious impulse, I try to break through the wall.

But like a tethered proverbial dog that was shown a red meat, I bounce back: to the confine of my original circumference. The wall is lustrous but hideous. Repulsive it is, such that any outside particle that tries to emerge through the wall is immediately passed through a strong magnetic separatory sieve. The influx and out flux are well defined.

I wish, in earnest, the wall didn’t exist, and even so that I could just replace it with a free space-replace it with just one continuous space. But that is just a wish. The wall pre-existed me. The operating system on the other side of the wall is prototyped. Bureaucratic maybe! It is inflexible in its own way such that any particle outside the membranous wall is repelled while the enclosed ones are retained, nurtured and programmed to be the principal system which all the other systems, those from within and without, vow before.

But wait! Maybe, I’m too naïve. Maybe, the wall between me and the life behind the wall isn’t the problem. It is, therefore, not a problem of replacing one reality with another but of the two realities. The problem, though, is the complexities of codes assigned to entities on either side of the wall. Perhaps, just replacing the wall in between, without synchronizing the two systems on either side of the wall, is not a feasible strategy.

Momentarily, I find myself at the edge: the interface of two immiscible systems, in all the existence to the two sides, and in all the existence for me and those behind the wall. Stranded at this interface, I figure out that maybe debugging and reprogramming the two systems to be represented by one code would surely demolish the wall in between.

So, I ask myself one fundamental question.  Should the code be preferentially attached to the control system or made global? Universal! Yes, universal. This looks like a crazy and an impossible undertaking. Some part of me seems to give in to the notion while the other disagrees. “Nothing is impossible,“ says the one part.

My conscious mind does tell me that for any two operating systems to functionally operate in harmony, they have to share a similar coding system. Indiscriminate passage of particles through a membrane that was previously impermeable to diversity, whereupon fear, dissimilarity, suspicion, and mistrust are filtered out, fulfills the archetypal definition of our common universe.

Everything that we want to pass freely across the wall must be debugged of its primordial codes, and reprogrammed to more receptive phenotypes. Or else, the systems will die, and cease to exist. Finally, my thoughts follow a clear path-one system one code!

Ajang Aguer

Will the “Greater Bor” Name Survive?

By Garang e Ciluel

Will the “Greater Bor” Name Survive?

I think enough is enough ladies and gentlemen. The name Dinka Bor that has been used to generalized the people of the three counties (Twic East, Duk and Bor) has always been controversial but because people where engaged in bigger problems than the names, it was just left in that controversial state.

I have never known any time in the history of this name where people were all comfortable with it. So, why do we kid ourselves when it is not working at all? I am glad that people have started talking honestly about this issue.

However, there are some people who still don’t get it. First of all, before we part ways and live harmoniously as brothers and sisters minus the controversial name, we need to understand when the name Bor first emerged and what transpired after. For those who have not read or heard history and thought that we have always been Boor, I will tell you a couple of things.

In my understanding, the Twic/Twi, Nyarweng and Hol were never call Bor till recently. I have no idea when Gok and Athooc started calling themselves Boor. Maybe somebody should help us with that. When I was growing up in the 80s, I knew there were Twi/Twic (where I come from), Nyarweng, Hol and Bor/boo.

I apologize; I didn’t know the existence of Gok and Athooc until recently but only knew them us Boor/Boo. In the same 80s, an individual from Nyarweng composed a slightly funny song about Boor/Boo, that goes like; “Panda ekë ye nhiaar të cïï rap luok/Luo, aluel Boor/Boo wuobë lo Jonglöng”.

The question is, if these people where Boor/Boo, why would they reference Bor/Boo as something different. It does not really matter whether other people call us Dinka Bor or not. We have to agree upon the name.

That labelling can change so quickly. It was introduced by a small group of politicians when the four Dinka groups in question did not give their concern and they were/are not party to it.

Today, we are doing the same mistake. The word Greater Bor emerged from outside the country and does not reflect the will of the majority in South Sudan. If there was something called Greater Bor, our three counties would have carried the name Bor (i.e, Bor South, Bor Central and Bor North).

To me, it would have been the perfect scenario. The fact that we have Twic East and Duk Counties is an indication that the name Bor is rejected by most people in those counties.

In the ECS, there is Diocese Bor and Diocese Twic East. Diocese Duk is in the making. Even when everything is clear, we are still ignorant of the reality. Please do not quote me wrong. I am not in any way promoting division among our wonderful communities that have a lot in common to cherish.

But shying away from the reality in the name of unity is the most dishonest thing that you can do to these communities.

For those who are advocating for Greater Bor, please start your campaign at the grass roots level (i.e at the counties level). This Greater Bor in diaspora is going to fail terribly. A minority cannot push their agenda down the throat of the majority and expect to succeed.

In that regard, I would like Deng Lueth Mayom and his co-leaders of the Greater Bor of the USA and other Greater Bor Groups around the world to listen to both sides of the coins.

There are two groups that are not comfortable with this generalization and we should not ignore them. The first group is the Bor Asili group that claim the name Bor and feel threatened that their name is being hijack by members of Twic East and Duk County.

On the other end are members of Twic East and Duk counties that do not consider themselves as Boor/Boo.

In order to quieten these people, we need to prove to them that the majority of our people in the three counties support the idea.

Dismissing these voices as minority is a dangerous mistake that may be regrettable in the near future.

You can reach Garang e Ciluel at: ciluelgarang@yahoo.com