Page 24 - EVOLUTION OF THE SUDAN PEOPLE’S LIBERATION MOVEMENT(SPLM),

that it answers questions such as where do we go from here, what now? What do we do with
our hard won independence? Who are we as a nation? How do we forge nationhood out of
desperate ethnic, racial, linguistic, regional and sub-regional groups (Tandon, 2008:67).This

thesis assumes the definition of national and social question as elaborated by both Mkandawire
and Tandon. Though broad, it shall rely on selected variables of the definition for illustration of
SPLM conduct of the armed struggle.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

This study privileges from the theoretical formulations of Amilcar Cabral and conceptualization of social
movements in African context. As liberation movements and prodemocracy movements come into power
from the 1960s and 70s, Sub-Saharan Africa could eventuallyturn its back to the colonial period. An

upsurge of democratization in the early 90s meant that ‘not a single de jure one party state persisted in
Africa’ (Bratton & van de Walle 1997). Yet, multiparty politics remain on rocky soil. In consideration of the
earlier times, electoral activity in the new democracies has gone in tandem with factual one-party rule and

restrictions on civil society, media and oppositional activity. International media often faults suppression of
democratic rights on individual political leaders.

Leaders do, however, represent political parties. While considerable academic and political interest
followed the “third wave of democracy” (Huntington 1991) in the south in the early 90s, little attention

was given to the transition following the establishment of democracy, and to the agents, in many cases
liberation movements and pro-democracy movements, that carried the process forward. Yet, their struggles
to transform into political parties set a heavy mark on the political processes in present sub-Saharan Africa.

Institutionalization of parties and party systems has generally not progressed from fluid to stable party

systems in Africa like in other parts of the world. Several question in fact whether party systems in Africa
can at all be conceptualized in line with the comparative literature (Lindberg 2007). While some argue
that centrism and elitism in several parties in South Sudan is caused by lack of pluralism in society at
large, weak civil societies and/or the culture of African societies, this Thesis argues that the legacy of their

organizational past sets its marks on many new political parties.

To understand this, the study will employ two theoretical framework, Amilcar Cabral theory
of national liberation and social movement theory. Liberation movements are diverse in forms
but share certain characters and aspirations. Liberation movements share the understanding that

people are not currently free or are in bondage that needs liberation. Liberation movements were
armed movements and organised with highly centralised decision-making, secrecy and command structures.
Their goal was not necessarily democracy, but independence and justice. The liberation movements modus

operandi was the military struggle rather than the democratic political channels, their arena was “the bush”
rather than political institutions and parliaments.

Their means of mobilisation, targets and goals were similarly different from those of democratic movements
or parties. The narratives and memories of war, secrecy, militant rhetoric and command structures shaped

their organisations but also the new political elite. Many liberation movements also adopted a Leninist-
inspired approach to organisation, emphasising the vanguard role of leadership (Hyden 2006). Coming
18