This morning, I woke up to war chants and warning messages flooding social media. This is a troubling sign for our country. Who is pushing people back into conflict when both President Salva Kiir Mayardit and Dr. Riek Machar Teny have publicly rejected war in their respective forums, despite the incomplete implementation of the peace agreement they signed in 2018?
The return-to-war strategy has allegedly been developed by Oyet Nathaniel, who, along with other stagnant opposition groups, is attempting to incite conflict to promote an agenda that does not genuinely reflect Dr. Riek Machar.
Oyet Nathaniel, the self-proclaimed SPLM/A-IO acting chairman, is pushing a war strategy that the SPLM/A-IO members and the fighting force must carefully evaluate. Mr. Oyet has recurrently demonstrated, both in his words and actions, a clear animosity toward specific tribes. His approach to warfare is inconsistent with Dr. Riek Machar’s “no return to war strategy,” which enabled him to travel to Juba without armed forces.
Dr. Riek Machar has consistently opposed a return to war, and anyone who genuinely cares for him and his national principles would not initiate conflict while he remains imprisoned. This represents a profound deception by those who claim to prioritize his well-being and the nation’s future.
Oyet and his associates from various political groups, who have stalled politically in foreign countries, claim that Dr. Riek Machar Teny and the leaders imprisoned with him are mere sacrificial lambs. They assert that even if they die, the SPLM/A-IO will still capture power. Capture power for whom? Did Dr. Riek Machar ever instruct anyone to sacrifice him? Is that truly his intention? I doubt Dr. Riek made such a statement.
The strategy of initiating a war while the leader is in prison is fundamentally flawed. War will only deepen internal political divisions, undermine national unity, and destabilize the state. It is important to note that neither Dr. Riek Machar nor President Salva Kiir is the one instigating this conflict.
The Nuer, in particular, have remained peaceful despite the arrest of Dr. Riek Machar because they believe justice will ultimately prevail. Rightly so, Dr. Riek will be acquitted innocently, no matter how long the case drags.
However, in Dr. Riek’s absence, Nathaniel Oyet; a man with a questionable identity, standing between South Sudan and Uganda, appears to want South Sudanese to turn against one another. He wants us to butcher ourselves.
In the case of Dr. Riek Machar, we have consistently stated that Dr. Riek has no legal implications in the matters concerning Nasir; these allegations were fabricated by those who seek to benefit from conflict, the warmongers. Now some of them are out of the equation. Oyet, who appears determined to instigate wars for his allies without any genuine connection to Dr. Riek, should not deceive the Nuer. They are attempting to rally Nuer fighters to support their agenda. You know them, and I know them too.
Oyet Nathaniel is misleading Nuer fighters into staging a war by delivering unscrupulous speeches and inflammatory rhetoric that threatening to the intactness of the national fabric. He is not a leader that can lead South Sudan. He is tribal and sentimental. This conflict, like many others, cannot distinguish between civilians and soldiers; it ultimately becomes indiscriminate. The children and innocent people from both the Nuer and Dinka ethnicities suffer and die in large numbers. Meanwhile, Oyet faces little to no consequences.
Drop the war slogans, cease all hostilities, and engage in dialogue as one united people. Oyet’s statements are consistently inflammatory, and they now receive backing from self-serving politicians who are preoccupied with conflicts abroad, remaining detached from the suffering and loss of innocent lives at home.
Some warlords mistakenly believe that opposing the current leadership justifies aligning with even the most brutal murderers, and they seek to coerce others into adopting their corrupt principles. We are all opposition groups, but we carry different moral values. If bloodshed and the deaths of our people define leadership, then we would be better off not being leaders at all. By staging or supporting war, we would be killing the very people we claim to want to govern. Such behavior is unacceptable.
The writer, Dr. Sunday de John, holds an MBA and a Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBChB) from the University of Nairobi, Faculty of Business and Management Sciences and Faculty of Medicine, respectively. He is the current Chairman of the South Sudan United Front-Progressive and can be reached via drsundayalong4@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.