By Santino Riak Maker
The TUMAINI Initiative was established in cooperation between specific stakeholders in Juba and Nairobi, with the aim of relocating negotiations from Rome to Kenya. The focus of this change appears to be shifting from promoting real peace to placing the initiative in a vulnerable framework, allowing local power players to influence outcomes for their own gain. The gains here are political power and financial benefits. This situation has led to essential questions about the true motivations driving the initiative, which appears to prioritize control over genuine reconciliation efforts.
The National Leadership Council (NLC) central to the TUMAINI is an essential element with authority surpassing that of parliament, the judiciary, and the executive branches of the government combined. The NLC suggests that its decisions would be final and are not going to be subjected to any scrutiny from the legislative and executive branches.
With the introduction of this council, TUMAINI effectively suspends the South Sudanese constitution, eliminating key oversight mechanisms and replacing established institutions with a centralized authority. The proposed NLC, with its “political stewardship” in national governance, poses a direct threat to the independence of South Sudan, democratic principles and the established functions of the presidency.
The initiative’s design suggests a hidden agenda to bring about regime change by sidelining the government of South Sudan and establishing a technocratic leadership. Pagan Amum and Gen. Paul Malong seem to be strategically preparing themselves for positions within the new system, using TUMAINI as a platform to pursue their aspirations.
This peace process is belied, the clandestine aspect of it has not been revealed. The suggested strategy could cause instability in the existing political system, challenge the authority of the present government, and jeopardizing peace efforts by prioritizing personal interests over national cohesion.
TUMAINI’s narrow focus fails to address issues from regions like Equatoria, where concerns raised by leaders like Gen. Thomas Cirillo Swaka remain key in ongoing conflicts. By neglecting these concerns, TUMAINI risks sparking new opposition and more rebellions while protracting the already existing conflict, witnessed in recent skirmishes in Central and Western Equatoria states and of course, the usual road ambushes.
By excluding groups such as the National Salvation Front (NAS) and other established opposition groups, the initiative overlooks the complexities of South Sudan’s political scene, reducing the possibility of achieving a truly inclusive peace.
TUMAINI’s labeling of Pagan Amum, Paul Malong, and Stephen Buoy’s factions as “holdout groups” is incorrect and diminishes the credibility of those genuinely striving for change.
The holdout groups are those under Gen. Thomas Cirillo. They were grouped under the South Sudan National Democratic Alliance (SSNDA) following their breakaway from Khartoum in rejection of the agreement that didn’t address the root causes of the South Sudan’s problem.
The true holdout groups are the NAS led by Gen. Thomas Cirillo who doubles as chair of the SSNDA, NDM-PF by Amb. Emmanuel Ajawin, SSNMC by Dr. Vakindi Umvu and the UDRM/A led then by comrade Tut Doap.
Malong’s SSUF/A was not part of 2018 agreement and so there is no way it could be called a holdout group in an agreement that rejected the party. Courtesy of Hon. Gabriel Changson’s call, SSUF/A delegation led by Hon. Eli Magok was turned away in addis Ababa Ethiopia. Pagan Amum’s faction is not a holdout group too. When he failed to get the Vice Presidency as that of Former Detainees (FDs) was designated for a female, he protested and left the country and has to create the name Real SPLM for the first time in the Hauge Netherlands, this was in conformity with needs of the new alliance that was later referred to as SSOMA.
By calling these factions holdout groups, the TUMAINI is in essence breaching the copyright of true owners of the name. The reason for doing this is to dismantle the true holdout groups who have a sticky agenda, that truly calls for federalism as an irreducible minimum. In other words, the classification weakens the influence of genuine supporters of change and weakens the trust in TUMAINI and can possibly promote further division in South Sudan’s political landscape.
Another mistake is that, TUMAINI initiative has chosen to target individuals like Dr. Riek Machar. The storyline by those behind the design of the NLC structure has made it clear that the target is Dr. Riek who is seen to have been gagging President Salva through a collegiate design of the R-ARCSS, particularly in decision making at the level of presidency and this proposal is made to dilute the work of the presidency as defined by the R-ARCSS and put in place a Council of eleven (11) leaders that would render Dr. Riek Machar and whatever contribution he makes inept since the decisions would be based on two-thirds majority. Who knows, both Kiir and Riek are being targeted?
The sale of this barren idea reveals a potential bias that could exacerbate the volatile situation the country is in. The initiative’s apparent attempt to target and marginalize influential figures with substantial following would probably create an exclusionary process that undermines the values on which the R-ARCSS are premised.
The sinister motive underlying this plot has the ability to disrupt the reconciliation efforts by creating discontent and resistance among the parties to the R-ARCSS.
It also goes without saying that the TUMAINI Initiative undermines the established role of the Community of Sant’Egidio in the conflict resolution.
With a background in leading negotiations among the warring parties around the globe and following their commitment to initiate dialogue and bring together the South Sudanese warring factions in Rome, Community of Sant’Egidio functions as a reputable and impartial mediator, wholeheartedly supporting the Pope’s peace endeavors.
The Pope’s dedication to promoting peace has had a significant influence, particularly seen in his visit to South Sudan and humble gesture of kissing the feet of its leaders. These efforts have positive impact on South Sudan as leaders are having reflection on this endearing actions from Church’s top men. However, the TUMAINI dismisses these attempts and opposes the inclusive and faith-driven approach of the Community of Sant’Egidio, choosing instead a process defined by political strategies, dirty tactics and coercion.
The involvement of global bodies, particularly TROIKA, sparks fears of external intervention in South Sudan’s governance. The endorsement by TROIKA of individuals like Malong, despite sanctions, suggests conflicting interests that may not prioritize the stability of South Sudan. By supporting TUMAINI and not the R-ARCSS, TROIKA risks being linked to self-serving motives and worsening trust issues between the South Sudanese people and global organizations. The involvement of foreign entities undermines the independence of South Sudan and diminishes TUMAINI’s reputation as a peace endeavor.
There is this fake plot that TUMAINI will absolve South Sudan from economic crisis. This is a deception. TUMAINI Initiative’s emphasis on financial incentives for South Sudanese citizens overlooks the nation’s potential for development. South Sudan’s natural and human resources are key for sustainable development, but TUMAINI’s need for foreign aid may promote a sense of dependence. By making this mistake, the program is revealing its ignorance about sustainable development and its disregard for South Sudan’s sovereignty in deciding its future.
The TUMAINI Initiative represents a political move to concentrate power in an unconstitutional framework, endangering South Sudan’s independence and democratic institutions. It diminishes the chances of genuine reconciliation by ignoring the Community of Sant’Egidio peace efforts, silencing important viewpoints, and supporting a selective agenda. The initiative’s credibility as a peace process is in question because of its hidden motives, foreign reliance, and failure to uphold constitutional principles, putting stability at risk and increasing the chances of further division.
The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by ThejubaMirror News are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made is the responsibility of the author, not ThejubaMirror News
