The Troika, IGAD and AU should leave the implementation of the peace agreement to South Sudanese only

The Troika, IGAD and ARCISS guarantors: A home-grown solution is the lasting solution to South Sudan’s problems

By Mariak Chol Majok, Kampala, Uganda

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

August 3, 2016 (SSB) — When the President penned and assented his signature into the Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (ARCISS), hopes were at the high gear that the war which had been raging on for two good years would come to an end, there were enchanting ululations everywhere across the country, analysts had put forward that the peace would be the final silencing of the guns and we forged the way forward to re-unite and live once again as one Nation, as we would work on revitalizing and revamping our economy.

Right from the word go and based on the way ARCISS was designed by the so-called International Community and its guarantors, South Sudanese with sound minds were not happy with it because of the disingenuous nature of some peace actors and the SPLM/A-IO camp. But since it was viewed as the only tangible mechanism to bring to an end the suffering of our people and abate the war of interest being imposed on us, the Government of the Republic of South Sudan (GRSS) Negotiation team, with the full mandate accorded to them fully by the President H.E Salva Kiir Mayar to bring peace back at all cost, the team negotiated the peace fully till the end.

The 3-week extension of the UNMISS mandate is unfortunate and unacceptable

United Nations Security Council’s unilateral extension of United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) mandate for another three weeks is unfortunate and unacceptable

By Maliap Madit Mabior, Kampala, Uganda

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

August 3, 2016 (SSB) — Acting on the recommendation of the Secretary-General, the security council resolution 1996 (2011) of July 2011, established the United Nations Mission In South Sudan (UNMISS) for an initial period of a year from 9^th July 2011, with intention to renew for further periods as may be required. The mandate of the mission ended on the same the following year.

The United Nations Mission In South Sudan – UNMISS’ objectives include the following; To consolidate peace and security and help to establish conditions for development in the Republic of South Sudan, with a view to strengthen the capacity of the Government of South Sudan to govern effectively and democratically and establish good relations with its neighbors.

If UNMISS had adhered to these core objectives, we would called it a better mission but it deviated and as a result, one would undoubtedly say that the mission (UNMISS) doing ‘No Good’ to the nation – South Sudan and qualifies my position to call it impartial or a failed mission.

Kush words to her children

By Joe Mabor, Malaysia

–

Do you yawn for peace in the land?

Stop blowing own horns about your coerce to knockout your brother

And start preaching peace. Peace is the absence of war and violence.

–

Is unity what you really desire?

Stop complaining about the worst part of your brother

And start liking the best side of him,

This, both the worst parts disappear because love consumes them

 Like wild fire does to the forest of trees and grasses.

THINK AGAIN: South Sudan needs new ideas, not a UN-imposed government

It’s also not a given that the UN or the African Union (AU), or some combination thereof, will actually govern any better. ‘The fact that people think it is okay to say things like that shows the level of condescension that still dominates the intervention realm. Saying to people who fought for more than 50 years for the right to self-rule that they are not capable of doing so, reeks of arrogance and hypocrisy’ said Lauren Hutton, an independent consultant with the ISS.

‘But even more so, Lyman and others assume that they (the UN and/or the AU) know how to run the country better than South Sudan’s current leaders.’

Hutton suggests that the international community would be better served by increasing humanitarian assistance, and by rethinking their commitment to the current political balance in the country (so often reduced by outsiders to the relationship between President Salva Kiir and his sometimes-deputy Riek Machar).

While South Sudan is undoubtedly in need of new ideas, Lyman and Knopf’s radical proposal to replace the government with international trustees is unwieldy and unworkable in practice. Back to the drawing board.