Page 99 - EVOLUTION OF THE SUDAN PEOPLE’S LIBERATION MOVEMENT(SPLM),

CHAPTER EIGHT

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

“We have not met the expectations of our people because of the unforeseen difficulties we got ourselves in”.
Riek Machar, Vice President 9 July 2012.

8.1 Conclusions

When the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was signed in 2005 marking the end of the civil war
and the beginning of the transitional period, the SPLM assumed responsibility for governance.

The CPA had a provision for a ceasefire between Khartoum and SPLM. Furthermore, power
and wealth sharing protocols were included with a 50% sharing of oil. There was to be political
independence in six years after a referendum on the same. The transitional period was aimed at
allowing the SPLM to establish systems, policies, processes and structures of governance. The

legacy of war had ruined and devastated South Sudan causing underdevelopment, ubiquitous
poverty and hopelessness among the people. As such, SPLM was supposed to establish and lay a
foundation for a modern and viable state. On the contrary, SPLM hardly focused on building the
necessary institutions, structures and policies of governance but were preoccupied with politics

of the Belly (Bayart, 1993). What is more, the ruling elites engaged in worst forms of rent
seeking and prebandal neo patrimonial politics where the line between public and private forms
of accumulation was thin or indistinguishable.

The contestation for power and resources within the movement assumed violent proportions as
elites jostled for political power. This was not a new trend within the movement rather part of

a political culture that was started by John Garang in 1983. During his reign as the leader of
the movement, it was plagued by authoritarianism and personal rule. In fact Garang summarily
executed his political opponents. Furthermore, he was intolerant of constitutional norms,
democracy to the extent that even Salva Kiir and RiekMachar fell out with him at the time

he died in August 2005. Splits and factionalism was established tradition and political culture
within the SPLM. The most serious political rifts occurred in 1991 and 2001 after the failure of
the Khartoum Peace Agreement. In fact what kept together the movement was common dislike
for the Khartoum regime and quest for political independence.

While addressing a conference entitled in October 2012 organized by Brenhurst Foundation and
Konrad with the theme: From liberation movement to Government: past legacies and challenges

of transition in Africa Christopher Clapham made the following observations about liberation
movements in Africa. Firstly, he noted that all liberation movements share a powerful sense of
legitimacy and right to run a government. They also share a common purpose, commitment and

discipline that shaped the liberation struggle. As a movement, they are people centered, and with
strong grass root support. Even as they enjoy strong support, liberation movements he noted have
difficulties transiting to a government as a result of liberation tradition and culture.
93