Page 102 - EVOLUTION OF THE SUDAN PEOPLE’S LIBERATION MOVEMENT(SPLM),

special leadership, sharing gains and losses equitably, pursuit of national interests rather than the interests
of the markets only as pursuit by political, social and economic elites whose rent seeking and belly politics
predominate.

It has been a running theme in the chapter that liberation movements exposed immoral behavior of the party
elites partly because they did not make optimal use of hard earned legitimacy to create equitable economies,

democracy, and ethnically cohesive communities. Amilcar Cabral noted that success of a liberation movement
turned governments depended on the moral character of the persons leading the struggle especially their
honesty and decency. He noted that leaders be of high integrity and beyond reproach. Liberation failure

could thus be attributed to claims of governing on the basis of liberation legacy as opposed to moral, decent
and accountable leadership once in power.

The assumption to power gave liberation movement’s additional advantage of accessing state resources
and control of legitimate instruments of governance and coercion. Once used in the national and public
interest, the state would transform the society. On the contrary, liberation movements were consumed by

the very acts of liberation and instead used the state power to betray the struggle. In fact, there is a wide
deficit of democracy as governments are run by closed group of leaders and their families forming a new
aristocracy or governing class that replaces the former oppressors. Rather than governing in national or
public interest, patronage and personal rule take center stage. A top down structure with power among few
in the hands of political leadership.

The other legacy is that of us versus them. The liberation movement is seen as the embodiment of the
people and the legitimate carrier of their hopes and dreams. They regard themselves as the authentic voice
of the whole nation. Those who betrayed or did not join the movement are perceived as outside the political
ladder and not capable of leadership. Those groups lacking struggle credentials are considered outside the
power matrix and not worth political leadership as its justification is what you did in the bush. The SPLM

by all accounts, the chapter has failed highlighting the hypothesis of poor leadership. Cabrals thesis of
betrayal is evident in SPLM as the struggle brought curse not liberation.

The fifth chapter is about the post conflict reconstruction of South Sudan and ways of securing sustainable
peace and reconstruction. The chapter notes that liberal peace narrative of reconstruction has failed
pointing at alternative models that have worked elsewhere. Post reconstruction models in Eritrea, Angola,

Mozambique and Iraq failed largely because of external interests in the implementation hence a paradigm
shift, concludes the chapter noting South Sudan is no exception.

This research raises a number of questions about the nature of liberation movements in Africa
and why they fail in their liberation endeavor. This thesis raises a number of question for
further scholarly attention. In particular, the study on SPLM is a case study that cannot be

generalized to make biding observations since it is just a case study after 2011. A comparative
study with other liberation movements need to be undertaken. What is more, fresh research on
where liberation movements fail to address the fundamental issues in the liberation movements
though a comparative study with other liberation movements in Asia and Latin America warrants

scholarly attention.

96