(كادقلى) بين قوسين..

You did not but implicit in the narrative, which incidentally happens to be identical to the official Khartoum talking point, is the relation between the SPLA in the South and the one in the North as being the main factor in on-going wars in Southern Kordufan and Southern Blue Nile. Darfur is added to the narrative occasionally. As you recall, there were separate protocols for both areas and whose implementation was to take place concurrently with the one regarding the South. In fact, the two divisions, which consisted mostly of Northern Sudanese, did redeploy to the South as per agreement and the disarmament process was going well in Southern Kordufan and in Blue Nile regions, Popular Consultation was to take place as stipulated in the CPA. Elections were held and key figures in SPLM held senior positions in both states. With South gone, somebody in Khartoum decided that it was a good idea to disarm the SPLA soldiers in both states by force. I understand that a lot of people in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile are disappointed by the outcome of the referendum, especially those who fought a long side Southerners.Their frustration is completely understandable and we, in the South, are struggling with fact that this could be a moral dilemma of historical proportion, and to be honest, nobody knows how to deal with it. However, Khartoum wants the South to actually participate in disarming the SPLA North, demanding unfettered access to South’s military facilities. This is what they called the disengagement of the two branches of the SPLA and upon after a genuine bilateral relationship can develop between the two countries. That happening is highly unlikely.
Regards.