The Big Debate-Dinka vs Equatorians

For the last few weeks, a disturbing debate kept on going between South Sudanese chat roots and internet website revealing that inter-ethnic or regional relations is going from bad to worst even as South Sudanese are confronted with with an impeding show down between NCP and SPLM. From the outset, the exchange are focus on issues around the rule of law i.e. robbery and general thuggery; incidences of rapes; land grabbing; forced marriages and child kidnapping, and a myriad of gender based violence. Also there are specific or general perceptions shared widely among the Equatorians that, the Dinka nationality are responsible for the failure-perceived or real- of GOSS to deliver on its promises to ensure effective rule of law, social services and a measure of recovery in many aspects of development.

Certainly Dinkas on the net could not be expected to take the demonization of their communities lightly as evident by their responds on websites and chat rooms not restricted to certain groups. Arguments written by Dinka writers follow lines of defense, disbeliefs and counter claims.

What is really the problem? what are the underlying causes of these raging accusations and why particularity at this critical point in time of transition processes from war and totalitarian rules to stability, peace and democratic systems?

Conspiracy theorists on both sides tend to have some body, a third party, to blame for this verbosity which can easily escalate to confrontation. Media, internet in particular can serve as a dangerous tool that can spread dangerous messages that are more likely to cause genocide. Rwandan genocide of 1994 is a 'good' example of how media can be used for destructive purposes.

In my view, the problem centers on our ability to manage or govern the processes of transition described above: The general population, irrespective of their differences in terms of ethnic, religious or political affiliations, had high expectations from CPA and its institutions top of which, GOSS. It is all about good governance. Just to differentiate it from good government, good governance is about how the state, civil society, and the private sector as stakeholder, deal with the overall environment that allows the citizens to realize their collective aspirations, vision/common purpose.

In other word, good governance encompasses all the South Sudanese as far as their collective identity is concerned.

Now, the grievances being expressed in the net will not cease as some people would wish. Why? It will is like to continue to take an unacceptable turn unless we boldly give it a bit more objective analysis, beyond the confrontational approaches now taking place. Through sobriety and conversation that entails keen listening to the 'other', thinking through issues before reacting, we are leaders of our communities can reach some consensus on the core problems now bedeviling us. We can more no to articulate the 4 's': Suggestions, strategies, solutions and services, to the satisfation of all.

If the core problem is that 3 years down the road, since January 9, 2005, we are yet to overcome challenges of transition, then what are the underlying causes?

It for now start with vision. Does there exist a collective vision for South Sudan? A vision that inspire all of us? Or there are contrasting, conflictive visions pulling the population apart?

A state whose purpose for exist is not clearly not articulated and shared is more likely disintegrate. Vision, articulated by the leaders and opinion shapers gives focus, Focus yields concentration and cohesion of efforts towards the realization of that collective purpose or vision. This what good governance policy makers and practitioners call effectiveness.The old adage says, where there is no vision, the people perish.

Vision guide plans for development, security etc. to the satisfaction of the people. Peoples satisfaction earns leaders, from village up to GOSS/central level respect and support. The lack of it, wrath.

My entry point, before cover other areas that show good governance, in its broader meaning and definition, was the existence of vision. Next in the list are:

• rule of law
• accountability
• parriticipation and citizen engagement
• equity

Bye for now