There are many ways to describe the failed state of South Sudan under the SPLM-IG. Diplomats prefer to call it a “fragile state.” Economists say “distorted.” Politicians mumble “transitional.” But when a system begins to look less like a government and more like a well-organized criminal syndicate with modern symbols such as a flag and other national items, honesty demands a sharper term: gangster capitalism. However, this is not capitalism in any meaningful sense because it is neither markets, competition, nor innovation.
Instead, the current system of government in South Sudan fits to be described as a violent economy of extraction, where wealth is accumulated not through production but through coercion, intimidation, and state-enabled theft. It is the merger of power, guns, and money into a single criminal enterprise, where the line between a cabinet meeting and a cartel briefing becomes purely ceremonial. In the system of South Sudan, ministries behave like rackets, the treasury becomes a vault for insiders, and the security forces, once defenders of the people, are redeployed as enforcers of elite wealth accumulation.
Under a system like what we have in South Sudan, the reform movements, such as the SPLM-IO under Dr. Riek Machar and others, become the outlawed enemies. They are treated not as political competitors and reformists, but as existential threats to the system of gangster capitalism. This system outlaws the real reformists because you cannot reform it without dismantling it in totality or carrying out incremental radical reforms that lead to a complete overhaul.
Gangster capitalism: The functioning system in South Sudan
Having explained what constitutes gangster capitalism above without putting the direct question as to what it is in plain English, let me ask this simple question: What constitutes gangster capitalism? In its literal meaning, gangster capitalism is what happens when:
- The state is captured by elites who use it as a personal business.
- Economic power is enforced by guns, not laws.
- Public resources are privatized without accountability.
- Institutions exist for formality or only as decoration, not as constraints.
Therefore, the state where gangster capitalism exists is, in effect, a mafia state wearing a constitutional costume. Hence, it is in that respect that critics have called this type of system, as we see in existence in South Sudan, as:
- A “militarized kleptocracy,” which is a system of thieves under which generals double as businessmen.
- A “shell state for elite enrichment”, where governance only exists as theatre.
- An “accountable-to-none oil cartel”, where national wealth vanishes without any trace.
- A “cartel of impunity”, where law exists only for the powerless.
If that sounds exaggerated, it is only because reality has outpaced satire. Several reasons can support the existence of this reality in South Sudan.
Ten reasons indicating the existence of a gangster system and why reformers become targets in South Sudan
They threaten the oil cash machine
In a functional state, oil funds are for development. In gangster capitalism, it funds lifestyles. For example, billions in oil revenue flow through opaque structures like Nilepet with minimal public accounting. The result is that, asreform demands transparency, transparency in turn threatens theft, which makes reformers become enemies.
They disrupt off-budget theft schemes
Corruption is not accidental; it is engineered. For instance, the “Oil for Roads” program reportedly consumed billions of dollars with little to show on the ground. As a result, anyone asking “Where did the money go?” is treated as a security threat, not a citizen.
They challenge the war-economy model
A system born in war often refuses to graduate into peace. For instance, military-style command structures dominate civilian governance. As a consequence, reformers pushing institutional governance are seen as dismantling the very machinery of control.
They reject patronage politics
Gangster capitalism runs on loyalty purchased, not legitimacy earned. For example, political funding is selectively distributed to reward obedience and punish dissent. As a result, the political reformists like theSPLM-IO’s insistence on the structured implementation of agreements like R-ARCSS directly threatens this system.
They oppose militarized asset seizure
In the system of gangster capitalism, property rights depend on proximity to power. For example, security organs are used to grab land and businesses. As a result, reformers advocating for the rule of law are effectively challenging armed economic domination.
They expose currency manipulation and financial arbitrage
The economy becomes a playground for insiders. For instance, preferential access to foreign exchange allows elites to profit while the currency collapses. As a result, calls for financial discipline undermine elite profit channels, and those who make such calls become outright enemies.
They interrupt the business of humanitarian exploitation
Even suffering becomes monetized. For example, aid agencies face taxation, obstruction, and rent-seeking barriers as we have been seeing on the border of Nimule and other areas inside South Sudan. As a result, reform threatens a system under which famine relief doubles as revenue generation.
They question elite luxury amid public collapse
Nothing irritates a looter more than a spotlight. For example, massive spending on luxury items such as Toyota Land Cruiser V8s contrasts sharply with underfunded healthcare and education. As a result, reformers highlighting this imbalance expose the moral bankruptcy of the system.
They advocate paying civil servants properly with living wages
An unpaid state is a controllable state. For instance, chronic salary arrears push officials into corruption for survival. Consequently, a professional, paid civil service would demand accountability, an unacceptable risk to the cartel.
They undermine the politics of division
Divide-and-rule is not a side effect, but it is a strategy. For instance, ethnic tensions are manipulated to distract from systemic looting. As a result, reformers calling for unity and institutional governance threaten the very survival mechanism of the system.
The central irony: From liberation to predation
The most tragic, and frankly, absurd, element of this story is historical. The SPLM-IG, which claims to be the movement that once fought:
- Marginalization
- Religious imposition
- Economic exclusion
Has now reproduced a system more predatory, more extractive, and more indifferent to human suffering than the one it replaced. It is as if the struggle was not to dismantle oppression, but to inherit it. It is indeed pathetic.
Why the SPLM-IOand Dr. Machar are framed as “the problem”
They are framed as such because in a gangster system:
- Reform is sabotage.
- Accountability is rebellion.
- Law is subversion.
The SPLM-IO’s insistence on:
- Implementing the R-ARCSS in full or in letter and spirit
- Strengthening institutions
- Subjecting power to law
This is not seen as politics. It is seen as an economic disruption of a criminal order. And criminal orders do not negotiate with reformers. They isolate them, discredit them, and, where possible, neutralize them.
Conclusion: When the state becomes the syndicate
Gangster capitalism is not just corruption. It is corruption elevated into a governing philosophy. It is a system where:
- Theft is policy,
- Violence is regulation,
- And poverty is a strategy.
Under such conditions, the real question is not why reformers are targeted. The real question is: How could they not be? This is because when governance becomes organized crime,
Anyone who demands a state is automatically an enemy of the syndicate.
The writer is a South Sudanese constitutional lawyer, academic, and political reformer, and a member of the SPLM-IO. He is a lecturer and Deputy Dean at the College of Law, Starford International University in Juba.
The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by Radio Tamazuj are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made is the author’s responsibility, not Radio Tamazuj’s.
and then