The attempt by Dr Sunday de John to portray Nigeria as having acted improperly in calling for the unconditional release of South Sudan’s First Vice-President Dr Riek Machar is both misleading and illusionary.
On February 15, 2026, the African Union (C5) Ad hoc Committee, chaired by the President of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa, convened a meeting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, attended by IGAD and East African leaders, the UN Secretary General, members of the UN Security Council and AUPSC, to discuss the status of the R-ARCSS and its implementation.
The purpose of that meeting was to prevent the escalation, preserve the Agreement, and return to political dialogue.
I refer to the opening remarks of President Ramaphosa, explicitly supporting mediation and reconciliation, between President Salva Kiir and Dr Machar, and emphasizing unity and reconciliation.
Nigeria was not wrong to call for the unconditional release of Dr Machar, and Dr de John should strive to be consistent. A few months ago, when he was interviewed by a journalist in Nairobi, he was clear that Dr Machar did not commit any crimes to be tried in a special court in Juba.
The Nasir incident was a violation of the ceasefire and was supposed to be investigated as stipulated in the Peace Agreement. There are so many examples that were handled in a similar manner.
Nigeria was not wrong and will never be wrong to call for the unconditional release of Dr Machar. Nigeria did not speak alone at that summit. Those attempting to isolate Nigeria were deliberately distorting facts. Nigeria represents the West Africa as a bloc within the C5 and the ad hoc committee that is chaired by South Africa. Its position reflected a continental consensus.
I want to reiterate that not only Nigeria called for Dr Machar’s release in Addis Ababa. Kenyan President, William Ruto made an equal call and for an immediate cessation of hostilities in South Sudan.
President Ruto reiterated Kenya’s position to Juba and urged the summit to focus on the shared objective of supporting a peaceful conclusion of the transition, culminating in the conduct of genuine and credible elections.
To achieve this, President Ruto called for the immediate cessation of hostilities, the release of political detainees, the strengthening of civilian protection, and the provision of urgent humanitarian access and assistance. He called for the establishment of an IGAD sub-committee of Heads of State and Government on South Sudan, comprising the frontline states, in coordination with the AU-C5 plus, to provide sustained political oversight and strategic guidance to the peace process.
Nigeria was not wrong. The African Union (C5,) the UN, the Security Council, IGAD and the East African leaders have spoken to bring the war to an end. The statement of Algeria as a member of AU C5 was the same as Nigeria’s; the call for the unconditional release of Dr Machar and dialogue in South Sudan.
Ugandan Vice-President, representing President Yoweri Museveni, too acknowledged the crisis in South Sudan and called for talks. At the closing, President Ramaphosa repeated the same remarks, saying, we should bring an end to all violence and hostilities and allow all the electoral processes to take place.
It is for this reason that a clear recommendation is being made, that; (i) there should be a ceasefire and all hostilities must be brought to an end, (ii) as recommended by the Heads of State, there should be a release of political detainees, including Dr Machar.
Nigeria was right but was a victim of the Dr Machar detractors in South Sudan. To suggest that Nigeria acted recklessly, is to ignore the unified voice of African leaders for peace to prevail in South Sudan.
Nigeria’s was not an interference as alleged by Dr de John and Ateny Wek. It was a responsible continental oversight of returning to dialogue. The peace agreement provides the institutions to handle ceasefire violations, abandoning the mechanisms that placed Dr Machar under house arrest undermines the very legitimacy of the government that Juba is protecting.
One cannot defend the agreement in one season and discard its mechanisms that were supposed to resolve the disputes. The call for the release of Dr Machar was to restore confidence and trust to the R-ARCSS and stabilize the country. The real question is not whether Nigeria was wrong, but whether SPLM-IG and its allies were ready to prioritize the stability over shortsighted interests to maintain the status quo.
AU has spoken, IGAD, has spoken, the C5 has spoken, UNSC has spoken, the Troika has spoken and the wider international community has now spoken.
If truly SPLM-IG are ready for peace, then the recommendations of the C5 in Addis Ababa must be implemented, not politicized, for peace and stability in South Sudan. Nigeria was right to call for the release of Dr Machar from house arrest in Juba to travel to South Africa for a retreat.
The writer, Dut Majokdit, is a member of the SPLM-IO Political Bureau and former chairperson of the Relief and Rehabilitation Commission in Aweil, Northern Bahr el-Ghazal State. He can be reached via email: Majokdit2024@gmail.com
The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by Radio Tamazuj are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made is the responsibility of the author, not Radio Tamazuj.