BY YOAL MANYANG RIEK
I am writing in response to the article titled “The Genocides of the 1990s,” authored by Dr. Santino Ayuel Longar. In this piece, Dr. Longar makes sweeping, unfounded, and politically charged accusations against prominent South Sudanese leaders, Dr. Riek Machar and Mr. Taban Deng Gai. As a professional and as someone who believes in the values of peace, unity, and reconciliation, it is vital to address the baseless and divisive nature of this article, which fails to reflect the reality of South Sudan’s complex challenges. The rhetoric put forward by Dr. Longar not only undermines efforts toward peace but also promotes an inaccurate and harmful narrative that hampers the unity South Sudan so desperately needs.
Dr. Longar’s article is laced with tribal sentiment, which significantly discredits the credibility of the author and betrays the role that a law professor particularly one in a position of influence—should play in promoting fairness, legal integrity, and national unity. It is expected that academics, especially those in positions of authority, engage in impartial, reasoned, and evidence-based discourse that fosters an environment of healing and mutual understanding. Instead, Dr. Longar’s piece demonstrates a blatant disregard for this responsibility by resorting to politically motivated, inflammatory accusations without providing credible evidence to substantiate his claims. Such an approach is not only unprofessional, but it also undermines the very principles of justice, truth, and fairness that should guide academic writing, especially in a nation as fragile and divided as South Sudan.
One of the most troubling aspects of Dr. Longar’s article is how it seeks to exploit the painful history of the people of Unity State by placing the blame for its suffering solely on Dr. Riek Machar and Mr. Taban Deng Gai. While it is true that both individuals have been central figures in South Sudan’s political history, to reduce the entirety of the region’s hardships to the actions of two individuals is both a misrepresentation of historical facts and a disservice to the people of South Sudan. The suffering endured by the people of Unity, particularly in the 1990s, cannot and should not be viewed solely through the lens of personal blame. The history of displacement and hardship in Unity is far more complex and multifaceted than Dr. Longar’s article suggests.
Indeed, the suffering of the Unity region is deeply intertwined with the broader geopolitical and economic forces at play in the country. It is well-known that the discovery of oil in Unity in the early 1990s led to targeted efforts by the Khartoum-based government to displace the population to secure access to these valuable resources. This was not the result of any one individual’s actions, but rather a consequence of the broader dynamics of war, political maneuvering, and resource control. To lay the blame for this displacement on Dr. Machar and Mr. Deng Gai, without providing context or credible evidence, is a gross oversimplification of a much more complex reality.
Moreover, the article’s reference to the kala-azar pandemic in the 1980s and the assertion that Dr. Machar was somehow responsible for the mismanagement of aid during that time is equally troubling. It is important to note that the response to the kala-azar epidemic was not solely within the purview of South Sudanese political leaders at the time, but was largely handled by international humanitarian organizations such as Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), which operated independently of any political or military influence. The assertion that Dr. Machar, in his capacity as Zonal Commander, purposely denied medical services to the people of Ruweng is a claim that lacks credibility and evidence. Such accusations do not contribute to constructive dialogue or reconciliation; rather, they serve to perpetuate division and distrust.
South Sudan’s history is marked by a series of deeply rooted and interconnected conflicts involving numerous actors, both domestic and international. To attribute all of South Sudan’s problems to the actions of Dr. Machar and Mr. Deng Gai ignores the broader political, social, and economic forces at play. These forces have been shaped by decades of war, competition for resources, ethnic tensions, and the failure of successive governments both under Sudanese rule and following independence to address the needs of the South Sudanese people. Dr. Longar’s reductionist narrative fails to account for these complexities and instead shifts the blame onto specific political figures, effectively obscuring the systemic issues that continue to plague South Sudan.
The challenges faced by the Unity region and South Sudan as a whole must be addressed through a national lens, one that takes into account the country’s diverse socio-political realities. A truly sustainable peace process can only be achieved through unity, inclusivity, and fairness, not by relying on tribal perspectives or personal attacks. Dr. Longar’s article exacerbates the divisions that have caused South Sudan so much suffering. By resorting to politically charged rhetoric, he undermines the critical work needed to build peace and trust across the country.
Furthermore, as an Assistant Professor of Law, Dr. Longar is entrusted with the responsibility of fostering balanced, critical thinking among his students and the broader academic community. His article, however, reflects a profound failure to uphold the values of critical legal analysis, fairness, and objectivity that should guide any academic inquiry, particularly in a context as delicate as South Sudan’s. Legal scholars and educators are expected to promote reasoned discourse that seeks to understand the underlying causes of conflict and propose solutions rooted in justice. Dr. Longar’s inflammatory approach, however, does the opposite by deepening existing tensions and perpetuating division. This not only harms the academic community but also damages the broader societal healing process.
It is crucial for all of us particularly those in positions of authority and influence to approach South Sudan’s challenges with a mindset of unity, compassion, and constructive dialogue. The road to peace and stability in South Sudan cannot be paved by tribalism or division. It requires collaboration across ethnic and political lines, driven by mutual respect and an acknowledgment of the shared humanity of all South Sudanese people. Dr. Longar’s article, unfortunately, stands in stark opposition to this approach. By perpetuating divisive and harmful narratives, it only serves to make it harder for the country to heal and move forward.
Rather than deepening divisions, we need to focus on inclusive solutions, that build common ground, and that prioritize peace and cooperation. We must engage in a constructive national dialogue that gives voice to all South Sudanese communities regardless of ethnic background, political affiliation, or regional origin. The only way forward is through solidarity, mutual understanding, and a collective commitment to the well-being of all citizens. The work of national reconciliation must be prioritized over political and tribal agendas.
In conclusion, Dr. Longar’s article does not meet the professional standards expected of someone in his position. As an academic, he should be striving to educate others on the importance of critical thinking, impartiality, and ethical responsibility. These values, which are sorely missing from his recent writing, are crucial for fostering understanding and healing in South Sudan. By failing to demonstrate these qualities, he has not only disqualified himself as a serious academic voice on these issues but also contributed to the perpetuation of division and hatred in South Sudan. South Sudan’s future cannot be shaped by tribal perspectives or narrow political views. We must look beyond these divisions and work toward a shared commitment to peace, progress, and the collective good of all South Sudanese people.
The writer is a diplomat with a Master’s in International Relations and Diplomatic Studies and a Master’s in Humanitarian and Conflict Studies and can be reached at yoal@live.com