PCCA Protest: Kiir and Machar are not excellent leaders and politicians

South Sudanese doubts whether South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir and rebel leader Riek Machar have the leadership qualities needed to deliver peace to the country at war since 2013.

Both have not shown the leadership required to bring genuine peace. Citizens remain skeptical that they can oversee a peaceful and timely transition to democracy and good governance.

The government’s reaction to the proposed protest by PCCA is an attestation to the fact that the government isn’t interested in its citizens. Still, the government’s interest is in making sure both leaders don’t lose relevance.

Why can’t the government address the entire country on a national broadcast? Why can’t government engage the coalition leaders rather than looking for a way to cut their throats and silence their voices.
The kleptocracy stands on the sand.

It lacks the confidence of the people. The plethora of press releases and deployment of security forces against the PCCA’s call for protest attest to this reality.

Accepted, no government will tolerate a call for regime change without a credible method of power transition. But are PCCA agitations genuine or not?

The people are frustrated with the lack of development because of senseless wars, but going back to anarchy is of no good to the country, rather than confronting poverty and lack of action together as South Sudanese using various expertise skills.

Regime change agenda being preached to be thought to take place peacefully. It is a fact that sometimes it comes with many hidden problems that the planners do not see when deciding. Still, in the aftermath, they indeed suddenly come to the surface.

In Libya, the people thought Gadaffi was the problem, but they suffered even more issues after he was gone. Such has been repeated in several other places.

South Sudanese should take Kenyan’s approach of patience and tolerance; otherwise, through quick temper and quick decisions made out of anger and frustration, we will tear the country into pieces for nothing if they don’t exercise restraint.

South Sudanese should relax this time, be patient and tolerant, and wait for this Peace Agreement to be implemented and wait for elections. Otherwise, they will destroy the little development the country has achieved for nothing, and the government will be seen mocked by the region.

Even before the war broke out in 2013, South Sudanese live in Uganda and Kenya, and imagine if no fight in 2013 by now, no one would be living in Kenya because the country would have achieved a lot, and all would have returned.

No demonstration is ever peaceful, and South Sudanese must understand this truth.

For one thing, any violent overthrow of the government would only engender more violence, as supporters of Kiir and his benefactors are likely to regroup and attempt to recapture their lost political positions.
What South Sudan badly needs is the institutionalization of democracy and not a government led by political opportunists.

An effective strategy to exit from this incessant violence must be centered around the election of an inclusive interim government—minus both Kiir and Machar—that would engage all the country’s relevant stakeholders in negotiations to create a governing process that adequately constrains the state, establishes mechanisms for the peaceful resolution of conflict, enhances peaceful coexistence, and provides an enabling environment for the rapid creation of the wealth needed to deal with poverty and deprivation.