Confederation Council Foundation for Africa Inc.,
Ban Slams Threats Against UN Personnel In South Sudan
"Ban is alarmed at the attempt today by senior members of the South Sudan government and army to force entry into the civilian protection site at the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS)'s compound in Bor," said a statement issued by Ban's spokesperson.
UNMISS has been providing protection for nearly 70,000 civilians at its bases including in Bor in Jonglei state since conflict erupted in the world's youngest country over a month ago, Xinhua news agency reported.
The statement said Ban is especially disturbed that UN staff were threatened by the South Sudan military after they refused to allow armed soldiers to accompany civilians to visit the UNMISS protection site.
Ban said Sunday's incident is just one of a growing number of violations of the Status of Forces Agreement, making it increasingly difficult for UNMISS to implement its mandate and highly risky for UN staff working in South Sudan.
"The secretary-general calls on the parties and their respective leaders to do far more to ensure that fighters under their command protect civilians and respect international humanitarian law," the statement said.
On Saturday, the South Sudan army said it had recaptured the strategic town of Bor held by rebels loyal to former vice-President Riek Machar.
Since mid-December, South Sudan has witnessed clashes between two military factions -- one descending from the Dinka tribe to which South Sudan President Salva Kiir Mayardit belongs and the other from the Nuer tribe to which Machar belongs.
Clashes have left more than 1,000 people dead and nearly 500,000 civilians displaced.
January 17, 2014 (SSNA) -- My dear readers globally, I would like to bring in to your attention about what is currently going on between the President of the Republic of Uganda and the small dictator in the Republic of South Sudan known by the name Salva Kiir. Many people are asking themselves what is behind the two gentlemen. And for your information, the two have agreed on some terms and conditions in order to make their progress to prosper well.
The agreement entered in to on January 10th last year bears the signature of Defense Minister Crispus Kiyonga on behalf of Uganda and an unnamed South Sudanese official, whose designation is also not shown.
It also makes no mentioned of the signatories and witness by the commanders and foreign affairs officials of the two Countries. Realistically, who is this Commander and foreign Affairs official who signed on behalf of the Republic of South Sudan? Base on my own judgment, the commander was General Hoth Mai, who is the current Chief of General Staff for the Sudan People Liberation Army (SPLA) and the former Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Hon Nhial Deng Nhial.
The seven page agreement is silent on who would meet the cost of war but mentions that Uganda would use its own military equipment and allow it freely move its militarily gear in to South Sudan. Uganda also undertakes in the agreement to compensate any third party claims arising from acts or omission by its soldiers. But either South Sudan or Uganda shall make any claims suffered by its servicemen or for damage or loss of properties during the war.
It also makes no mention of compensation of families of the UPDF soldiers that might die in line duty.
Base on over issues, will President Kiir and his Counterpart Museveni will survive from International Community?
The objective of the agreement based on the document they signed is to kill Nuer people very well in South Sudan and to use their guys who are money minded persons to help us to fight them and afterward no one will disturb you in leadership because other communities in South Sudan have no legitimacy in term of responding or opposing you, President Museveni told Kiir.
Furthermore, one of Ugandan that I studied with him some years back told me something through phone and sends me an email that entails the agreement between Kiir and Museveni on how they should share oil money in order to achieve their interest in time to come.
The agreement was designed in two ways; one was the money that President Museveni should get from the oil production in 2014 from Kiir government in Juba because Museveni is waiting for 2016 general elections where he is also looking for another term in the office and therefore caution his food friend (Kiir) to look in to that very fast before sending any troops to South Sudan.
Second was the agreement on how much should each soldier get in a day, because incase soldier died in the frontline, they agreed on one hundred dollar per a day to each soldier who will be in South Sudan.
Thirdly was the pocket money to the Uganda members of parliament especially National Resistance Movement stakeholders including the speaker of Uganda and Kiir and Musevni agreed on 3 million Uganda shilling to be send to each individual account so that they can approved the deployment of UPDF forces in the Republic of South Sudan without fail and that indeed happened.
The way am viewing President of the Republic of South Sudan Gen Salva Kiir Mayardit and Museveeni of Uganda, I got confused due to the fact that, they made a gentlemen agreement that have lost many Ugandans in the frontline between Juba and Magala where the forces loyal to Dr Machar and General Gatdet are at the moment. According to rebels they have reported that, they have killed many Ugandans in frontline and captured some of them alive.
Facts about their agreement
President Museeveni was given million dollars to be used as the money for his campaign in 2016 elections and the pocket money for president Yoweri and to convene some of the members of the parliament that might bring noise to the people of the Republic of Uganda but particularly to the National Resistance Movement (NRM) members of parliament excluding the opposition mps of the Republic of Uganda, which happened because on Monday this week, money were send to the various accounts of Uganda Members of Parliament especially the ruling party members.
And within the agreement they have indicated the amount of money to be given to each soldier day and they have signed the memorandum of understanding (MOU) based on the terms and conditions that no one from them will break in one way or the other. Each soldier is getting one hundred (100) dollar equivalent to four hundred and fifty South Sudanese pounds (450) in a black market rate. They further agreed that, the Uganda People Defense Forces (UPDF) and the Sudan People Liberation Army (SPLA) will be given the same uniform and fighting code in order to avoid confusion among the soldiers. They also agreed on the elimination of the Nuer society in the territory of the Republic of South Sudan, by using their men who are money hearted people who will not think of their tribe and the integrity of their community.
President Museveni assures Kiir that, these small Nuer who are still with you in the Army should be motivated in order for them to fight with their people so that, if any one claims we will be able to defend the interest of Uganda and South Sudan properly.
Furthermore, they also agreed on the people who were detained not to be release because two out of the eleven were killed by President Kiir after the meeting of IGAD in Juba last year December 2013. They are fearing to release the rests because question might come where are the rests of the political detainees, therefore they have agreed not to disclosed the information to any one because he (Kiir) and Museveni) are fearing International Community.
What might fail their agreement?
Basically, when you look in to the current fighting that is ongoing between Uganda combined together with Sudan People Liberation Army soldiers that are loyal to President Kiir and the Nuer Society, you will find that, President Museveni and the Ugandans will one day, one time will ask for the compensations from Kiir of his soldiers who have been lost in the fighting especially between Bor and Juba.
Based on what am projecting, Kiir leadership has come to an end even though what might be the perceptions of other people because we can just look at the current fighting that have spread all over the Country. The momentum and the velocity that the forces that are in Central Equatoria especially in Magala from Dr Machar loyalists , you will agree with me that, no Army will defeat them because they have so far defeated more than 30,000 troops from Museveni and Kiir respectively.
The only possible way I am seeing, is only for President Kiir to step down like the President of Central African Republic who resign last week because the way I am viewing the all scenario is that most of the Nuer warriors have combined and no one will defeated them I tell you.
Secondly, if Kiir is wise he should apology to the entire Nuer community for what had happened, maybe he should be allow to be in South Sudan territory after Juba is capture.
The author is currently lives in Australia, he can be reached at; firstname.lastname@example.org
South Sudan, the world’s newest nation entered into military accord with Uganda on the 10th of January 2013, just over eleven months before fighting erupted in Juba on December 15, 2013. The South Sudan News Agency cannot independently verify the date the agreement was signed.
The pact declares that Ugandan soldiers who commit crimes in South Sudan will not be prosecuted or punished and denies benefits to the families of Ugandan soldiers killed in South Sudan, according the Daily Monitor Newspaper (Uganda).
“Member of visiting forces shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the sending state’s law and courts in respect of any disciplinary or criminal offences which may be committed by them in the territory of the Hose state”, the agreement says.
“In case the host State establishes any member of a visiting force has committed any criminal act in the territory of the Host State, the Host State shall promptly inform the sending state of the alleged criminal act of its member and avail the sending state material evidence pertaining to the criminal act alleged”, the document reads in part.
The military pact bears the name of Uganda’s Defense minister, Crispus Kiyonga. However, the treaty does not provide a person's name on behalf of the Republic of South Sudan; raising questions as to why a sovereign nation should sign such a colossal treaty without making it public.
Earlier this week, Uganda’s president Yoweri Museveni admits that Ugandan troops are helping South Sudanese President Salva Kiir fight rebels.
Uganda has been widely suspected of fighting alongside with forces loyal to President Kiir. Most South Sudanese believe that Yoweri Museveni has chosen Kiir’s side. The recent disclosure over Kampala's military participation in South Sudan could further fuel the conflict.
Uganda: Museveni Admits Uganda Military Involvement in S. Sudan Conflict.16 January 2014
Kampala — President Yoweri Museveni on Wednesday revealed that the Uganda army have been actively fighting South Sudanese rebels led by the former vice-president Riek Machar.
Museveni also disclosed that Ugandan soldiers were killed and others injured when the Ugandan Peoples Defence Forces (UPDF) engaged the rebels just 90 kilometres outside Juba, just a day before Parliament approved Uganda's deployment in the world's youngest nation.
He added that the Ugandan soldiers were killed and others injured when the UPDF engaged the rebels just 90 kilometers outside Juba.
"Only the other day, January 13, the SPLA and elements of our army had a big battle with the rebel troops about 90km from Juba where we inflicted a big lost on the side of the rebels. We also took casualties and had some dead," he added without giving figures.
South Sudan's former vice-president Riek Machar denounced two days ago the direct involvement of the Ugandan troops fighting against his forces alongside Salva Kiir's army. He demanded their withdrawal from the country as a condition to accept the cessation of hostilities.
Machar also said on Tuesday the combined SPLA and Ugandan troops backed by six UPDF helicopter gunships, dozens of tanks and other heavy artilleries were defeated near Mongala in Central Equatoria state on Juba-Bor road.
President Museveni's admission of direct involvement came while he was addressing the heads of state during the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region in the Angolan capital of Luanda on Wednesday.
The admission by President Museveni that Uganda is fighting on the side of President Salva Kiir confirms claims by MPs that Uganda was actively involved in fighting in South Sudan and had lost soldiers in the crisis that started December 15 in Juba.
The army had severally denied it is involved in any combat operations in South Sudan.
Questioned about the developments, Defence minister Crispus Kiyonga deflected the question to the army spokesperson, Lt Col Paddy Ankunda, who said: "Well, the President has said it." He added: "Details are scanty at the moment but all I can say is that our forces had a very successful battle."
Speaking at the International Conference on the great Lakes Region, Mr Museveni said by yesterday [Tuesday] evening, the government of South Sudan, with the support from UPDF, had regained control of Jemeza [in Central Equatoria state on Juba-Bor road].
He also accused former south Sudan vice president Machar of planning and executing the failed coup. "... the question is: "If Riek Machar did not plan a coup in Juba, then why did his supporters capture Malakal, Bor, Akobo, etc?"
However, Machar dismissed the alleged coup attempt, saying the fighting between president guards was used as a ploy by Salva Kiir to get rid of his political opponents within the ruling party. Many South Sudanese also believe that president Museveni masterminded the plan duped as a failed coup.
In testimony to Congress, assistant secretary of state for African affairs, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, on Wednesday confirmed the involvement of the Ugandan army in the current conflict in South Sudan.
Answering a question by Congressman Randy Weber, she said the Ugandan told Washington they want to protect Key structures in Juba Nimule road which leads to Uganda and Juba airport.
"They indicated they have an interest in a stable South Sudan but also said they have an interest in ensuring that a democratically elected government is not overturned by violent means", she added.
Weber was the only congressman during the hearing to raise the Ugandan intervention in the inter South Sudan conflict, others including the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee stopped on the possible Sudanese role in the conflict but Greenfield dismissed any involvement from Khartoum side.
However during her presentation to the committee she was keen to omit mentioning the name of the Sudanese mediator Mohamed Ahmed al-Dabi who is the third member of the IGAD panel of mediators to end the conflict.
"We are encouraged by IGAD's leadership in convening the parties and strongly support the efforts of former Ethiopian Minister Seyoum Mesfin and Kenyan General Lazaro Sumbeiywo to find a peaceful solution through political dialogue", she said.
Posted Sunday, December 22 2013 at 02:00
Reports indicate that President Museveni has been in contact with Mr Kiir since the fighting broke out but details on whether the engagements were making any breakthrough were scanty by the time of writing this report.
South Sudan was viewed as a buffer between Uganda and Sudan following the decades-long conflict between the two countries in which Uganda backed the Sudanese Liberation Movement which won the
Al Jazeera America Op-ed: To understand the crisis in the CAR, beware of familiar narratives
Editor's Note: This op-ed originally appeared on Al Jazeera America.
The Central African Republic’s interim president and rebel leader, Michel Djotodia, was forced to resign today at a two-day summit in the Chadian capital, Ndjamena. Djotodia, who seized power through a violet coup last march, has been under immense pressure by former colonial power France and the regional kingmaker Chad for failing to stop bloodshed and establish order in the Central African Republic (CAR).
Until recently, very few Americans had reason to pay attention to the CAR, an impoverished, landlocked country about the size of Texas with 4.4 million people. Shocking reports of mass killings and beheadings of children have opened a small window into the CAR’s most recent upheaval. Unfortunately, the international press has not provided a full and accurate view of the conflict. Observers are explaining the violence in terms of religious polarization between Muslims and Christians. While some of the killings are indeed motivated by religious identity, casting the conflict as principally religious oversimplifies a complex crisis and risks further polarization of an already divided society.
The CAR has been a scene of both domestic instability and international neglect. It has seen five military coups and several rebellions since gaining independence from France in 1960. In 1966, Jean-Bedel Bokassa — a self-proclaimed emperor and president for life — deposed David Dacko, the country’s first president, and instituted a rule that was emblematic of the hyperpatrimonial African dictators of 1960s and ’70s. The decades that followed brought more military misrule, shallow democratization and a hollowing out of the state, which put the CAR on a downward development spiral. As a result, despite its mineral riches, the country stagnates near the bottom of the U.N. Human Development Index, which measures the level of development around the world using economic and social data. The CAR ranks 180th out of 186 countries on the index.
Years of institutional decay have left most Central Africans at the state’s margins, creating fertile ground for recurrent rebellion and violent coups. But the CAR crisis is not simply the result of domestic failures. External actors have repeatedly destabilized the country by exploiting its institutional weakness and political fault lines. France has consistently influenced political events in the CAR. On several occasions, it deployed French military forces to restore order, to safeguard its economic interests and install friendly regimes. Similarly, in order to serve their economic and regional security interests, neighboring Chad and Sudan had an equally long history of meddling in the CAR’s political affairs through direct military intervention and political support for warring factions. In 2003, Chad deployed soldiers from the elite presidential guard to help its erstwhile ally Francois Bozize overthrow President Ange-Felix Patasse, bringing an end to 10 years of relatively democratic rule — the first relatively stable regime in the CAR’s history.
Last March, the Seleka rebels, a 16-month-old coalition of five rebel groups from the marginalized northern part of the country, supported by mercenary fighters from Sudan and Chad, ousted Bozize without much effort. In a few months, the rebels threw out Bozize’s weak authoritarian regime. But the Seleka did not achieve total victory. To make matters worse, after remaining unrecognized as the CAR’s head of state, Djotodia stepped down amid emerging cracks in his Seleka rebel ranks. The rickety state before the Seleka’s arrival in the capital, Bangui, has now given way to total collapse despite the arrival of French troops and African Union peacekeepers.
Out of this collapse emerges an easy-to-understand story of sectarian violence that pits “Muslim” Seleka rebels against “Christian” self-defense groups. To be sure, distilling complex phenomena down to a few components is journalism’s stock in trade. And the CAR fits a familiar formula — another frothing shambles on the Dark Continent giving in to its supposed primordial violent urges, creating vast numbers of refugees in need of international aid.
The problem here is not so much that these depictions confirm stereotypes of Africa. Of course they do. And it’s not even the intellectual laziness of the comfortable Muslims-versus-Christians narrative. The problem is that these stories risk fueling sectarian violence in a country where, historically, Muslims and Christians have coexisted in relative peace. They also obscure the underlying causes of multiple, overlapping conflicts and their solutions. Ending the “religious” fighting is a minor part of any strategy that would create long-term stability in the CAR.
Christopher Day is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the College of Charleston.
Kasper Agger is a Uganda based Field Researcher with the Enough Project.
Read the full op-ed on Al Jazeera America.
Photo: Protestors carry a sign reading 'Resign Djotodia,' as they march to call for the president's resignation and the expulsion of Chadian peacekeepers in Bangui, Central African Republic (AP)