Page 78 - EVOLUTION OF THE SUDAN PEOPLE’S LIBERATION MOVEMENT(SPLM),

SPLM party embraced corporatism and largely serve the interests of its own elites within the
movement especially the powerful elite close to power ignoring demands of the ordinary people.
What is more, there has always emerged factional groups and internal rival groups constituted

by loyalty rather than shared ideological beliefs. From 2011 through 2016, South Sudan has
witnessed serious political rifts and internal factionalism resulting to civil war and collapsing of
the peace agreements earlier signed by the parties in the conflict.

5.2.5 An analysis of SPLMs response to social and national question: 2011-2014

David Hollenbeck (2011) argues that nation building involves creation of political and economic
institutions that can sustain national life. A government too must protect the rights of its citizens

and service justice for them. Land question and national cohesion are central to nation building.
According to Samora Machel for example, to decolonize a state means to dismantle the political,
administrative, cultural, financial, economic, educational, judicial and other systems that are an
integral part of the colonial state and were solemnly designed to impose foreign domination and
the will of exploiters on the people. The state fails to address the social and national question if it

does not provide the following: security, health, education, economic opportunities, environmental
protection, legal framework, judicial system and physical and communication infrastructure.

The national liberation movements were involved in nationalist projects. According to Hippler
(2005; Tandon, 2008 and Zeleza, 2003), national projects had five core objectives of promoting
competitive national economies and social integration, construction of collective identities,

safeguard of sovereignty and territorial integrity, achievement of legitimacy and consolidation of
state power (Hippler, 2005). On his part, Yash Tandon defines the national project as following:
“the national project is not solely a nationalism strategy but a strategy for local, national, regional
and south self-determination, independence, dignity and solidarity. It is the essential political

basis for any strategies to end aid dependence.

It is a continuation of the struggle for independence. It is a project that began before countries of
the global south got their independence and then in the era of globalization, it appeared to have
died a sudden death and now needs to be revived (Tandon, 2008:66). Wamba (1991) refers to the
national question and project as “how global form of social existence characterizing the internal

multiplicity and relations of society to its environment is historically arrived”. Building common
consciousness out of people of racial, ethnic, class, gender, religious and generational differences
(nation building), observes Hippler (2005). The agenda of nation building is therefore according
to Mkandawire (2009) articulated as national question or a way of forging nationhood. Ntalaja

(1987) adds that national question is about economic, democracy, and social issues. National
project therefore sought to achieve multiple factors such as decolonization, nation building,
democracy and regional integration (Mkandawire, 1997).

The first responsibility of the SPLM government was to eradicate poverty, ignorance and disease
and promote economic development through redistribution of national resources. Reclaiming

the nation and resolving the national question in the context of neoliberal globalization required
capacity building and security provision including human security being emphasized. The SPLM

72