SPLM-DC and the Demise of Great Expectations
A year ago today, Lam Akol abandoned membership in the SPLM and formed the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement””Democratic Change (SPLM-DC). In a six-page statement released to the media, Akol rounded off a litany of grievances against his erstwhile colleagues in the SPLM.
He accused the SPLM of cronyism, lack of ideas and stifling alternative views to improve the party.
The SPLM-DC, he declared, was formed to “save the SPLM from the collapse it is heading for.”
By sticking to the SPLM name, Akol sought to tell the public that there was nothing wrong per se with the old SPLM. The problem, he said, was that a clique had taken control of the party and ostracized all progressive initiatives.
The SPLM, he reiterated, was now a spent force, one that “cannot pull crowds anymore, let alone dream of winning an election.” He emphasized that salvation rests in the new party, the SPLM-DC.
Akol’s attempt to appeal to the rank and file of his former party, the SPLM, was also visible in the symbolism he chose to evoke. The 6th of June, was the same day of the Ayod mutiny in 1983. The Ayod mutineers under Major William Nyuon Bany fled to the bush to link up with other renegades from the Bor garrison who rebelled a month earlier, to form the nucleus of what became the SPLA.
Given Akol’s stature as a senior member of the SPLM and architect of the 1991 split, the formation of the SPLM-DC was an emotional subject for Southern Sudanese as much as it was a major earthquake on their political landscape. On one hand, a section of the Southern polity felt that with independence from the North almost within reach, a unity of purpose was crucial to facing Khartoum. Akol’s actions, amidst accusations NCP bankrolling, were therefore retrogressive to the national objective of independence. On the other hand, there was a loud chorus that said the SPLM’s corrupt practices and overt nepotism deserved an answer in the form delivered by Akol.
But a year later, has the SPLM-DC become a viable alternative to the SPLM in the South?
In this article, I argue that despite the fanfare the SPLM-DC generated and the support it garnered from Southerners who were disgruntled with the SPLM, Akol’s new party is light years away from significantly impacting the political landscape in the South due to several factors which I discuss below.
The first factor has to do with Akol’s stature and political past. His seniority in the SPLM in the 1980s and subsequent leadership in the 1991 split has made him a recognizable name throughout the South. In this respect, the formation of the SPLM-DC gained wide prominence among the informed urban elite in the South.
On the other hand, Akol’s involvement in the 1991 break-up of the SPLA/M, and his numerous political alliances and party switching in the 1990s, casts him as an unreliable fortune seeker. SPLM propaganda was quick to capitalize on this, painting Akol as a back stabber out for his own personal interest. The refrain uttered to the Southern public was “˜He’s joined forces with the people who used to send the Antonov bombers and they are the ones funding him.’ To the simple Southern Sudanese peasant, this is a powerful message with far reaching consequences seen in the elections in April.
In other words, Akol’s leadership of the SPLM-DC is the party’s greatest liability in the South.
The other factor as to why the SPLM-DC is ages from having an impact in the South has to do with blunders committed by the party. The SPLM-DC has the dubious distinction as one of a few””if not the first””Southern–led party to be launched from Khartoum during peace time. This decision to launch from “˜foreign’ soil, coupled with allegations of NCP bankrolling, alienated the new party from its would-be base in the South.
To cut Akol some slack, it is true that the decision to launch the SPLM-DC in Khartoum, rather than in Juba, Wau or Malakal, was largely prompted by concerns for his personal security. However, no one expected that the fight for multiparty democracy in the South was going to be a walk in the park. In essence, those who aspire to enact change have to be in the thick of it, and if necessary, sometimes pay the ultimate price. Southern Sudanese liberation history is replete with examples of courageous people willing to be in the line of fire.
It is worth noting that the decision to establish the party in Khartoum greatly hampered efforts, if any, to develop a comprehensive policy to counter the accusations of NCP funding.
Another blunder that hampered the progress of the SPLM-DC in the South arises from the failure to immediately establish a foothold in the South after the launch of the party in Khartoum. Akol finally visited the South barely a month away from the April elections. And as expected, the party had very little time, amidst obvious intimidation from the SPLM, to market itself properly. As a result, the SPLM-DC won a total of five seats only: one in the South Sudan Legislative Assembly, another in the National Assembly in Khartoum, and three in the Upper Nile State Assembly.
Even in Akol’s home turf in Upper Nile State, where observers expected the SPLM-DC to win overwhelmingly, the party was a poor show. While it is true that the conduct of the elections leaves a lot to be desired in terms of free and fair balloting, the SPLM-DC’s long absence on the ground was equally an instrumental factor in this poor performance.
Has the SPLM-DC learnt anything from this experience?
Soon after the elections, the SPLM-DC retreated to its base in Khartoum. And once again, instead of building a base in the South, its secretary general has been reduced to writing press releases from Khartoum.
At its creation last year, the SPLM-DC was touted as a viable political alternative that would put the SPLM to task. Soon the Southern Sudan Legislative Assembly will resume sessions. The SPLM-DC has only one member, a factor that is unlikely to advance the party’s overall objectives. However, one expects that the SPLM-DC will not abscond the duty of checking and monitoring the policies of the SPLM. A presence of its party leadership in the visitors’ gallery in the SSLA in Juba would still be a welcome idea in as far as monitoring government policy is concerned. What is not clear is how the SPLM-DC will do this with its party leadership still residing in Khartoum.
More ever, it has failed to act like an opposition party and contribute ideas on crucial issues facing the South. Currently, the Government of South Sudan is battling a rebellion under the leadership of Gen. George Athor. The UN, elders and the Government of South Sudan have attempted to resolve the situation. However, the SPLM-DC’s voice has been conspicuously absent in offering ideas on how to resolve the conflict.
Like the other Southern parties, often bereft of ideas and initiative, the SPLM-DC seems to have joined the list.
To sum up, a year after the SPLM-DC’s creation, the new party looks like a spent force, due to the factors eluded to above. And in a sense the dream of a viable democratic pluralism in the South has died too. A major stumbling block to the party’s progress lies in the person of Lam Akol himself. His political past viewed in the prism of the Southern collective struggle for freedom from the North serves as a liability for the SPLM-DC. However, this incongruous political past will cease to have significance after the referendum. In that respect, perhaps the SPLM-DC’s best days rest in the future.
Brian Adeba is a journalist. He can be reached at [email protected]
English
Amharic
Arabic
Chichewa
Chinese (Simplified)
English
French
German
Hausa
Italian
Portuguese
Sesotho
Shona
Spanish
Swahili
Xhosa
Yoruba
Zulu
Dear Brian,
Could you comment on the SPLM-DC’s recent report that the SPLM-dominated Southern Sudan Legislative Assembly is taking steps to unseat elected SPLM-DC representatives? Irrespective of any political mis-steps by the SPLM-DC leadership, is it not entitled to its representation if that is what the electors decided?
Alex
Dear Brian
It is unfair to try now and cancel Lam Akol as a leader in his own right,he stood for what was then the true SPLM/A,and disgreed with the late Dr.Garang(May God Have Mercy on his Soul),and he was not alone.
You cannot also deny the tactics employed by the SPLM/A leadership in the elections in the South.
You misread the whole situation,if you claim that the South was or the SPLM/A was fighting for what you now call(Independence from the North),Sir,the North never colonized the South,the truth must be said,even if you are campaigning for secession,which seems to be the only purpose of your entry here.
Dear Alex,
I am not sure if “unseat†is the correct term to use here. The four SPLM-DC legislators are accused of involvement in the deaths of seven people, including a prominent chief. According to a letter I read allegedly written by Gier Chuang Aluong, the minister for internal security, the families of those killed were the ones who launched the case in Malakal. As elected representatives the four legislators are apparently “immune†from arrest unless that immunity is lifted. Aluong requested Michael Lueth, minister of legal affairs, for help with prosecuting the case. Lueth in turn, wrote to the speaker requesting this immunity to be lifted.
According to the Juba Post, the four were later picked up at midnight and to date have not been released.
Obviously, the SPLM-DC has every right to be concerned that this is an attempt to strip it of legislative power, given the past behavior of the SPLM. Whether this is going to be foul play on the part of the SPLM will be seen in court.
The political nature of this case, and its sensitivity, offers ample opportunity to test whether the South Sudan judicial system is impartial or not. In my opinion, this is the first case of its nature and will tell a lot about justice issues in South Sudan and whether the SPLM indeed interferes with this system.
However, it should be known that the murdered chief was a lone soldier in a predominantly SPLM-DC stronghold. He is accused of sympathizing with the SPLM; hence there is a strong motive for his murder in that ambush. The SPLM-DC argues that at the time of his murder, the four legislators were in Juba; hence they can’t be accused of involvement. A rather flimsy argument if you consider that one doesn’t necessarily have to be at a murder scene, to be guilty of or accused of murder. Osama bin Laden wasn’t in New York on September 11, 2001.
Also several other factors were at play in this scenario, if press reports from South Sudan are to be believed. There is apparently an intra-ethnic feud in the area where the chief comes from. It allegedly pits his clan against others in the region. One allegation that has been leveled against him is that he encouraged the disarmament of rival clans and avoided disarming his own. So several variables are at play and hopefully, the court will take into account all these, because it is possible that the chief was murdered by rival clans people who weren’t too pleased with his actions.
Dear David,
I have not “cancelled†Lam Akol as a leader, neither have I deliberately chosen to ignore the actions of the SPLM. I advise you to read the article again.
It might be true that the North never “colonized†the South, depending on our individual interpretations of what colonialism is. But again, for an entity to seek independence from another, it doesn’t necessarily mean the motivation lies in the urge to unyoke “colonialism.â€
For instance, the French-speaking Canadian province of Quebec has for generations aspired to be an independent state and referendums have been held to that effect, albeit unsuccessfully. The gist of the argument put forward by Quebec separatists is that they need to protect their French language and culture. It is worth noting that in democratic societies like Canada, Quebec enjoys full and equal rights as other provinces. As a matter of fact, the French language is one of Canada’s official languages. I don’t know whether you can say that of Sudan.
Colonialism is not the only impetus for an entity to aspire to be independent.
I am not sure where you get the notion that I am parroting and supporting independence in the article. But if indeed I came across as supporting it, then let me remind you that self-determination is an inalienable right and should not be criminalized or made to appear sinful as you imply in your response.
Dear Brian
First of all, I by no means, call self-determination for South Sudan,as stipulated for in the CPA sinful, I simply think that the emphasis that some, you included, place on Independence of South Sudan, is misleading, at least to those who are not as informed as you and others in this blog.
Secondly, Dr.Lam Akol is capable of defending himself. I am concerned by some of the factors you advance as causing the failure of the SPLM-DC.
You argue that some consider him as a back stabber who “joined forces with the people who sent the antonov.” My question to you and to those who advance these arguments is who nominated him to the post of Foreign Minister following the signing of CPA?
You also refer to the decision to launch the SPLM-DC from foreign soil!!!! Sir, Khartoum is not foreign soil for us, at least until the referendum takes place .
You refer to the struggle of the South for “freedom from the North”, this may be your reading of what the SPLM/A stands for now, but the SPLM/A was formed as a Sudanese National Movement for change,and called for “a new dispensation for the Sudan as a whole” and Lam Akol, like many others, don’t want it to be the “regional sub-species”, that some have turned it into now.
If you admit to the SPLM/A practices in the South now, why don’t we give Akol the right to be cautious about his personal security after having survived an assassination attempt? And remember that he was a commander in the field before and was in the line of fire.
English was recognized as the Official Language in the South in the Addis Ababa agreement, but and unlike in Quebec, where every one speaks French, in the South the lingua franca is Arabic (Juba Arabic). The issue of language is an elitist luxury, used to project to the outside world what some advance as a factor for secession, unless some one tells me the Southerners are also fighting to preserve the English Language.