In a move that was expected yet carries grave implications, President Salva Kiir has placed his First Vice President, Riek Machar—leader of the opposition SPLM-IO—under house arrest. This political escalation can only be interpreted as a deliberate attempt to eliminate the opposition and undermine the Revitalized Peace Agreement. While the government frames this action as a security measure to maintain stability, it is, in reality, a reflection of the ruling Sudan People’s Liberation Movement’s (SPLM) political paranoia over the mere existence of an independent opposition force within the government.
This is not merely a passing crisis; it is the culmination of deep-seated contradictions that have defined the relationship between Salva Kiir and Riek Machar since the signing of the peace deal—contradictions that now threaten the agreement’s total collapse. As a political activist committed to democracy, I see this move as undeniable proof of the failure of state-building and the ruling party’s blatant disregard for peace and democratic principles.
Deconstructing the Situation: How Was Machar’s Ouster Prepared?
To understand the decision to place Machar under house arrest, we must examine the series of events that precipitated it. The evidence points to a deliberate and calculated strategy to sideline Riek Machar:
- Undermining Machar’s Role in Government
Since the signing of the Revitalized Peace Agreement, Kiir has systematically weakened Machar’s political influence by restricting his access to resources, manipulating government appointments, and blocking his decisions. Key opposition figures have been sidelined from critical roles, violating the power-sharing agreement. - Deliberately Stalling the Unification of Forces
A cornerstone of the peace agreement was the integration of opposition forces into the national army, yet the government has intentionally delayed this process. Instead of facilitating unification, it has targeted key military leaders loyal to Machar—exemplified by the arrest of General Gabriel Duop Lam, a prominent opposition commander. - Neutralizing International and Regional Pressure
Kiir’s government has successfully weakened international scrutiny by prolonging peace processes for years. Exploiting regional crises—particularly in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo—it has ensured South Sudan remains a low priority for global mediators. - Manufacturing Public Consent for Machar’s Removal
Prior to imposing house arrest, the government orchestrated a media campaign in Juba to discredit Machar, painting him as an impediment to peace. Internal divisions within the SPLM-IO were exaggerated to portray Machar as an ineffective leader incapable of controlling his own movement.
Why Now? The Timing Behind Kiir’s Decision
What explains President Kiir’s decision to act against Machar at this moment? Several factors stand out:
- Preempting the 2026–2027 Elections
The government is preparing for upcoming elections, but allowing Machar to run would pose a direct threat to Kiir’s rule. House arrest serves as a preemptive strike to prevent Machar from organizing a campaign or negotiating from a position of strength. - Growing Internal Tensions Within the SPLM
Dissent is brewing within Kiir’s party, with some leaders questioning his leadership. The government likely fears Machar’s influence extends even to SPLM-IG members, potentially sparking internal defections. - Testing the International Community’s Resolve
Aware that global actors are preoccupied with crises in Ukraine and the Horn of Africa, Kiir is gambling that they will not take decisive action against South Sudan. By detaining Machar, he is probing the limits of international tolerance.
Is the Ruling SPLM Still Fit to Govern?
Machar’s house arrest exposes an uncomfortable truth: the SPLM, under Kiir’s leadership, is no longer capable of steering South Sudan toward stability. How can a government be trusted when it:
- Signs a peace agreement, only to dismantle it systematically?
- Preaches reconciliation while persecuting opposition leaders?
- Talks of elections while eliminating political competitors beforehand?
These contradictions underscore South Sudan’s profound political crisis and reveal an undeniable reality: this government does not believe in democracy—it views power as a personal entitlement to be preserved at all costs.
What Must Happen Next?
Given these dangerous developments, silence is not an option. The international community and South Sudan’s democratic forces must act decisively:
- Immediate Release of Riek Machar
His detention violates both his rights and the Revitalized Peace Agreement. The international community must demand his unconditional release. - Reinvigorating International Mediation
IGAD, the African Union, and the UN must reassert their roles as guarantors of the peace deal. The current government has proven it will not honor its commitments without external pressure. - Restoring Political Freedoms
Elections are meaningless if opposition leaders are imprisoned and dissent is crushed. Civil society must intensify demands for democratic space and fundamental rights.
Conclusion: Where Is South Sudan Heading?
Machar’s house arrest is not merely a security measure—it is a declaration of intent. It signals the kind of state Kiir seeks to build: one devoid of opposition, democracy, or accountability.
Without urgent resistance, South Sudan risks descending into outright authoritarianism, where decisions are made in shadows and dissent is extinguished before it takes shape.
The pivotal question remains: Will the people of South Sudan accept this fate, or will they rise to challenge this brazen abuse of power?
The author, Mahmoud Akot, is a South Sudanese political activist based in France. Reach him at: mahmoudakot@gmail.com.
The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by Radio Tamazuj are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made is the responsibility of the author, not Radio Tamazuj.