By Gatwech Deng Wal, Melbourne, Australia
UPDF Commander Operation, Kalongero Muhanga and UPDF Spokesman Paddy Ankunda at Bor Early 2014(Photo: file)
Dec 30, 2014(Nyamilepedia) — Deployment of other countries’ armies to South Sudan is for the primary purpose of accessing resources. This is similar to what America did to Iraq some years ago. They deployed their troops to Iraq in order to find “Mass Destruction Weapons” and later the result failed to uncover any such weapons in Iraq. However, it was just a plan to justify the invasion of Iraq to get their resources and boost their country’s economy. Now this is what is happening to South Sudan. East African countries and China are imitating American’s system; they are deploying their armies and troops to South Sudan under the guise of providing security and stability but it is business in the making.
Despite their claims of providing security and maintaining stability in South Sudan, they will make the situation worse and more fragile in that their desire to be present in South Sudan will make them compete for resources and more likely to be involved in conflict should anything go wrong in relation to their claims of providing security and stability in South Sudan.
A good example of these issues is Uganda and Rwanda armies. These countries’ armies and troops were deployed to South Sudan in the early stages of the war. Their main aim was to provide security and contain the situation in South Sudan. Yet, there has been no improvement and stability seen by South Sudanese and other people around the globe. Instead, they fought and are still fighting against the SPLA/M in Opposition alongside the SPLA/M Juba. Nevertheless, they committed war crimes by killing innocent South Sudanese with cluster bombs and machine guns. As Ugandan and Rwandan armies failed to provide security, I feel that other countries’ armies deployment will make no difference.
The deployment of foreign armies is business and resources ripe-off plan. This is because those countries’ armies will receive large salaries and incomes not from their countries but from South Sudan. At the same time they will import mineral resources to their countries under the guise of providing security in the war-torn country, South Sudan. Such large salaries and mineral importation to their countries will then cause South Sudan to carry large debts that may never be paid off.
It is hard to imagine that those countries can deploy their troops in the pretext of security while wanting to extract resources from South Sudan. If Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)’s leaders or mediators failed to bring peace and stability to South Sudan through negotiation, then it would be much better to leave South Sudanese alone with their affairs.
The current atrocities committed by Ugandan and Rwandan armies are enough and should cease. South Sudan is for South Sudanese not for foreigners to take advantage of. Instead of deploying foreigner troops, Ugandan and Rwandan armies have to first pull out from South Sudan in order to give peace a chance and minimise the level of injuries, fear, and threats of violence to South Sudanese. Although IGAD’s leaders or mediators are not doing enough to bring peace to South Sudanese warring parties, it is their responsibility to seek another way of bringing peace and stability. Deployment of foreign armies will not bring peace, security and stability in South Sudan.
The author of this article is a student who is studying postgraduate/Master Degree of Justice and Criminology. He studied mediation and conflict management and is waiting to be accredited to be mediator. He can be reached by email. His email is firstname.lastname@example.org