{UAH} Of EAC, conflict in South Sudan

Of EAC, conflict in South Sudan

BY ATTILIO TAGALILE

12th January 2014

Email

Print

The on-going fighting in Africa's new nation, South Sudan, raises questions over the future of East African Community, EAC.

 

It once again proves, beyond reasonable doubt, why Tanzania's faith in the EAC is nothing more than a misplaced optimism.

 

Therefore the lessons that can be learnt include, among others, the need for Tanzanians to concentrate their efforts and energy in building the country's economy instead of expending it in experimenting construction of regional blocs.

 

One of the tale-tell signs that EAC is destined for another failure, but this time around with a thud, is the conduct of some of the EAC members towards the crisis in South Sudan.

 

For instance, instead of playing a mediation role with the aim of bringing the fighting to an end, Uganda has decided to send troops there not to stop the fighting between the warring sides, but to join President Salva Kiir's troops.

 

During this week Voice of America's live transmitted television programme, Straight Talk Africa, hosted by former Ugandan paratrooper turned television journalist, Mr Shaka Ssali, the South Sudanese ambassador to the United Nations in New York claimed that Ugandan troops had been sent to his country to help bring back home Ugandan citizens trapped in the war.

 

However, former Vice President Riek Machar's representative in the television programme said the Ugandan troops had been sent to help President Kiir's troops in the fighting.

 

But late last week, Machar was quoted by the international media as warning President Yoweri Museveni against sending troops to support his friend, President Kiir.

 

The conduct of Ugandan government  in South Sudan is serious because instead of helping the two warring sides to stop hostilities, Uganda is doing completely the reverse, pouring fuel onto the inferno.

 

In fact, nothing exposes Uganda government's intentions in this conflict more than the John Garang factor. The founding father of South Sudan was killed in a Ugandan owned chopper piloted by a Ugandan Colonel.

 

The fact that Garang's widow, Ms Nyandeng and her son, are on the side of Mr Machar raises a number of questions over circumstances that led to the mysterious helicopter crash that killed Colonel Garang and his delegation of ten senior SPLM officials.

 

According to one of the participants on Wednesday's Straight Talk Africa Programme, the on-going fighting is not related, in any way, to tribalism between the Dinka and the Nuer.

 

The participant said the fighting erupted over disagreement between those who support President Kiir and those on the side of the former Vice President, Machar.

 

However, whether the fighting is a result of differences between the top government leadership or tribal between the Dinka and the Nuer, that is immaterial.

 

The fact of the matter is that over 1,000 people have already been killed as a result of the fighting and this makes both leaders to the conflict potential members of the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

 

What makes the fighting extremely serious is the fact that despite claiming to be on top of the situation and commanding government troops, it is indisputable that President Kiir has failed to run over the troops supporting his former vice-president.

 

The implication of this is that the two warring sides are evenly matched and divided. And what is more, Africa is, once again, going to witness a long, drawn out war, the presence of the Ugandan troops in the conflict notwithstanding.

 

And if Uganda is not careful, it is going to be sucked into the war that could spell the end of Museveni's grip on the country.

 

According to political and military analysts, the present war in South Sudan was long expected.

 

After the country's independence, direct and immediate beneficiaries were businessmen and job seekers from Kenya and Uganda who moved in their hundreds.

 

It was a sigh of relief, especially for Kenya which has always had problems on how to jettison to other countries its growing, educated population after the usurpation of land by Kenyan leaders that has left hundreds of Kenyans landless.

 

Therefore, the latest fighting in South Sudan means both Uganda and Kenya have interest in what is going on in the new, oil rich African state whose land mass is bigger than both EAC states, and this is the second reason why Uganda has moved its troops there.

 

Kenya would have done the same thing; move in on the side of President Kiir. However, the unfinished war they had engaged in, in Somalia, has reduced, somewhat, their ability to involve themselves in another war.

 

But their intention is certainly not different from that of Uganda, and should they finally decide to get in, its not difficult to guess which side they will support.

 

This makes Tanzania's continued stay in EAC precarious given the hidden intentions of both Kenya and Uganda over conflicts which may crop up in any of the community member state.

 

Another problem that should make Tanzanian leaders wary o is what happened in the Democratic Republic of Congo a few weeks ago when a group of armed men tried to capture a government radio and television station in Kinshasa.

 

Over 200 people were killed in the fighting and government troops finally triumphed.

 

But to date it is not known who organized the planned capture although fingers are being pointed at countries in the eastern part of the country where a few months ago a United Nations Intervention Force commanded by a Tanzania Army General from the Tanzania People Defence Forces reduced what had until then been a feared rebel group, M23, into a minced meat.

 

Many political and military analysts believe that after the sound beating of M23 which saw some of their members running into Rwanda and Uganda, President Joseph Kabila, will certainly have to strengthen his security because it is now clear that rebel groups within or without the country cannot get in through eastern DRC because of the presence of the battle tested UN intervention force.

 

Therefore, the only way of causing instability in the DRC is through the kind of assault that a group of armed men tried to carry out in Kinshasa a few weeks ago.

 

In conclusion, the formulation of what came to be infamously referred to as 'Coalition of Willing' kept both Tanzania and Burundi in limbo.

 

The involvement of Ugandan troops in the South Sudan conflict raises questions over the future of the EAC, and in particular, Tanzania's continued membership in the organization.

 

It is important for Tanzanian leaders to bear in mind that during the break-up of the original EAC on February 5, 1977 (the very day that Zanzibar's Afro-Shirazi Party was merging with the Tanganyika African National Union, TANU to form Chama Cha Mapinduzi, CCM), Tanzania was forced, as result, to dig deeper into its coffers for its hard-earned resources in setting up infrastructure after losing jointly bought and financed institutional infrastructures.

 

One that Tanzania was forced to build, immediately, was the Mwenge satellite after the loss of the Kenyan-based EAC Earth Station at Mt. Longonot.

 

Tanzania was also forced to buy new wagons and coaches for the Tanzania Railway Corporation (TRC) apart from establishing its own airline, Air Tanzania Corporation, ATC.

 

However, the struggle to keep the national airline up, in the air, has to date continued to elude the country, hence the need for Tanzanian leaders to be more careful with the country's membership in the present EAC.

 

The safest way of avoiding the recurring of what befell the country in 1977 is for Tanzanian leaders to leave this organization before it is too late.

 

Tanzanian leaders should be wary of African leaders who send their troops across their borders to support wars whose origin they little know about.

 

When Tanzania send its 800 plus troops to the eastern DRC as part of the UN Intervention Force (while 1600 troops came from Malawi and South Africa), it did so after being requested by the international community through the United Nations.

 

And when their intervention was demanded, the UN force acted with aplomb, sending clear message to those who have made war their business that the international community would never tolerate such conduct.

 

The million dollar question is: the Ugandan troops now reported to be in South Sudan are in that country at whose request? 

___________________________________

Gwokto La'Kitgum

"Even a small dog can piss on a tall Building", Jim Hightower