Hon. Ateny Pech and Mading Ngor Akech Kwai want Leek Mamer dead because he knows too much about their ulterior motives.
That stated, I beseech the government of the Republic of South Sudan to pause, look twice, and think beyond the noise being generated in the name of Leek Mamer Leek. The narrative surrounding him is a struggle for control—control over armed youth, control over the narrative, and control of the truth. For this reason, it raises eyebrows; the matter is a significant national security concern.
At the helm of this matter are two men: Mading Ngor Akech and Hon. Ateny Pech. Having both failed to secure the services of Leek Mamer Leek and his Red Belt, they now seek to destroy him. According to Leek, he and his colleagues in the Red Belt did not rise as rebels. They rose as community defenders in response to cattle raiding, violence against their community, and the collapse of local protection. His forces, the “Red Belt,” were not created to challenge the state; they do not have a political agenda. Their interest is to protect cattle, villages, and civilian lives where the state has receded. This fact matters because the origin of these forces speaks to their intent.
According to Leek, Mading Ngor Akech tried to co-opt him. However, local protection entities like the Gelweng, White Army, Arrow Boys, Nyirango forces, and now the Red Belt are dangerous for political manipulators. They cannot be easily owned.
Leek has made his position clear to the duo. He has declined to sell out his men, his cause, or the community he dearly loves and has vowed to protect with his blood.
In their separate attempts to coerce him—Mading Ngor into rebellion and Ateny Pech into becoming a brutal local force for eliminating adversaries—Leek resisted. His focus remained the protection of the community and their property. Having failed to secure the young man’s services, the duo now seek to eliminate him through the government by crafting false narratives in his name.
According to Leek in a recorded video, Mading brought him to Nairobi under the guise of safety. This followed a clash between Leek’s forces and raiders that could have prompted government scrutiny, perhaps for further investigation to find possible solutions. However, Mading Ngor had hidden motives; bringing Leek to Nairobi was not for safety but for recruitment. Nairobi is Mading Ngor’s marketplace for rebellion. He brought Leek to introduce him to rebel leaders. When Leek refused, Mading abandoned him and his companion in a hotel, leaving them stranded, and later opted to rewrite the story. Why did Mading leave them without notice? Why did he fail to return them to where he brought them from?
Mading Ngor Akech’s recent partial response to Leek’s narrative is untoward; it was skewed, a revelation of untruthfulness that has highlighted gray areas in the matter. He seems to know more about the Red Belt than its leaders do. He wrote with the intimacy of someone trying to manage it from above. His writing is not a rebuttal to Leek’s assertions; it is a prosecution brief—a piece designed to criminalize a young man who refused to be bought. He may have even received bargaining allowances from state actors or rebels.
Unconsciously, Mading Ngor has acknowledged his motives through his written piece. He wrote to counter-accuse Leek and others in a manner designed to incriminate them, rather than to deny or affirm Leek’s specific allegations. He claimed to reveal all in what he called a “full disclosure.” Is Mading a fifth columnist? Should government agencies take him in for further interrogation? Is he working for any rebel movement? Is he auctioning Leek? After his attempts failed, must Leek die to conceal the secrets?
In the case of Ateny Pech, his strategy to acquire Leek’s services was different but equally dangerous. He wanted Leek’s Red Belt as his private army—a local elimination force to crush his adversaries within Bor. When Leek refused to turn his boys into political hitmen, Ateny turned against him. He immediately rejected the Red Belt he had been supporting—the very force he once wanted for his own protection—labeling it a “threat.” He suddenly mobilized the community not for dialogue but for denunciation of the Red Belt. Deceptively, he invited government forces, particularly the National Security Service, not to investigate the events but to eliminate the “threat.” To my understanding, this is organized retaliation. In most instances, retaliation reveals the true motives.
An impartial analysis of this matter accurately shows that Leek’s crime is not rebellion, but his refusal to be misused by the political actors in question. Leek has refused to join a rebellion via Mading Ngor’s auction. He has refused to fight for Ateny Pech’s domestic ambitions. He has refused to turn community defense into elite violence. This means Leek is an upright man whose conviction is to ensure the safety of his people and their property.
Leek wanted to remain upright and refused to be bent into a tool for achieving political goals, but now his name is being fed into government systems as a security problem.
Is Leek Mamer Leek a victim of his own refusal to be misused? The government must reflect and ask this question. Who benefits from Leek’s death? If he is eliminated, the truth dies with him.
Another angle is that of Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth Kang. The narrative audible in Leek’s video suggests his involvement is limited to the protection of the community. He would never support Leek if he were a state enemy, which Leek is not.
The only question regarding Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth’s involvement concerns his stature as a statesman. Does his involvement stem from the influences of Ateny Pech and Mading Ngor? If so, what does that suggest about his national stature? Is he, a state actor, supporting one armed faction of his citizens against another? Are there no alternative solutions he can provide? I leave that for public contemplation.
Critically analyzing this matter, the statements issued by Ateny Pech and the community leaders he mobilized against the Red Belt, coupled with the writing of Mading Ngor Akech and his promised “full disclosure,” suggest something sinister is afoot.
Are Mading Ngor and Ateny Pech using state machinery to accomplish what they failed to achieve privately? If so, then these actors are dragging the government of South Sudan into a crime—the murder of its own witness—disguised as counterinsurgency.
This means state agencies should now look for Leek Mamer Leek not as a person to eliminate, but as a source for understanding all matters that transpired concerning the armed youth under his command and why he is targeted by those who once sought his group’s services for their own motives.
Those championing the elimination of Leek Mamer Leek and his group could be the true rebels, trying to kill the evidence, which is Leek himself. A clandestine movement may be struggling, which is why Leek and his men are being coerced.
It is important to note that insinuations of rebellion against the Bor community at this stage are unacceptable. The Bor community could not be hatching a rebellion in South Sudan because, since the inception of the government in 2005, Bor has been at the heart of South Sudan’s power.
Politically, militarily, and institutionally, Bor is involved. It is well represented in the government with irreplaceable ministers like Hon. Kuol Manyang Juuk and Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth Kang. This list is augmented by other key stakeholders like Gen. Peter Wal Athiou, formerly Undersecretary in the Ministry of Interior, and Hon. Abdon Agau, Secretary-General of the government. Alongside these political leaders are many in the top military hierarchy, including Gen. Jok Riak Makol, formerly Chief of Defense Forces (CDF), and deputies like Gen. Malual Ayom Dor and Gen. Wilson Deng Kuocrot, among many others. A son of Bor was once director of military intelligence. Bor has never lacked representation.
In terms of development, the only road constructed with South Sudan’s wealth runs from Juba to Bor. Therefore, when rebellion is whispered in the name of Bor, one must ask: who is speaking behind this mask? The answer is simple: it is those who want to kill Leek before he speaks.
The government should rethink its strategy toward Leek Mamer Leek. He should not be treated as a target. He must be treated as a source. He is a valuable source of information about the events that transpired in Nairobi. He is a source of information about who attempted to recruit him and who attempted to weaponize his boys. He is the source of information about who now wants to silence him.
If the security forces’ strategy is to kill Leek Mamer, they will not be killing a rebel; they will be killing the evidence. Unfortunately, when the evidence is gone, the real rebels—the men trading in chaos, manipulation, and blood—will walk free, hiding behind the flag they pretentiously claim to serve.
Till then, yours truly, Mr. Teetotaler!
The writer, Dr. Sunday de John, holds an MBA and a Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBChB) from the University of Nairobi, Faculty of Business and Management Sciences and Faculty of Medicine, respectively. He is the current Chairman of the South Sudan United Front-Progressive and can be reached via drsundayalong4@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.