سلفا إستيوبيد أم سلفا تخبط! الناس لو قالوا انقلاب ليهم حق!

No one with intellectual equanimity would take this kind of vile and calamitous rhetoric seriously without causing affront to your credibility. The underlining issue is whether or not Khartoum is capable of accepting the fact that South Sudan is an independent and sovereign country and hence be treated as such. You have to understand this jinni. Noam Chomsky’s “what we say goes” in describing American foreign policy, which is unilateralism in direction and which seemed to be the Khartoum’s ultimate choice as soon as the post independent negotiations were initiated several months ago in Addis Ababa was a shock to Southerners who thought of Bashir’s presence in Juba on the eve of independence as a beginning of an era of cooperation between the two Sudans.
Your quoting of Eisenstein to argue a case that our president is a mere ninny perhaps for daring questioning your attitude of what you “say goes” per South Sudan is not an issue. And Whether or not you have convinced yourself about Southerners inability to take care of themselves is the least of our of concerns. The issue here, my friend, is your government total disregard for international norms of settling disputes between neighboring countries. Thucydides principles of “large nations do what they wish, while small nations accept what they must “, a text book of Sudan’s attitude toward the South, may be applicable in the rarest of circumstances nowadays but not in the case of Sudan. Sudan is a rouge state, its leader an indicted criminal and has nothing to lose and uncertain of the future of his regime. Interposing interests in both Sudan and South Sudan are Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand” which Bashir kisses but frightens when South wants to touch a slice of that hand.