|
|
 Re: بعض قيادات و كودار الحركة الشعبية تطالب سيلفاكير بإعفاء د.لام أكول أجاوين من وزارة الخارجية (Re: Mohamed Doudi)
|
Dear Mrtada Gaafar
I believe that the performance of Dr. Lam Akol, as a minister of foreign affairs, should be assessed based on his past and recent political history. First, Dr. Lam led the 1991 first split in the SPLM/A on a false promise of separation given to him by the leadership of the NIF. Although he did declare the lack of democracy and human rights abuses in the SPLM as the main reason for his mutiny, the Bor massacres of October 1991 and many other human rights abuses occured under his orders. He and Riak Machar insisted that Dr. Garng must leave the movement if there was going to be any unity in the SPLM/A, failing that SPLM/A must be destroyed. This sounded like music in the ears of the NIF. To achieve this, Riak and Lam forged unholly alliance with NIF to fight SPLM/A, weapons were supplied, dollars changed hands and agreements were made in European hotels.
Second, when the project for the destruction of Garang and the SPLM/A failed, the April Khartoum Peace Agreement was signed, promising self-determination. Off course, the NIF did not mean what it signed. All it meant was to turn the war into south-south war. The self-determination provision was ignored. The NIF never stopped negotiating with Garnag, although at the signature of the Khartoum Agrement it had declared that the war was over, and Garang had taken refuge in an African country, which it could not name. Riak/Lam's factions were absorbed into NIF Khartoum Government. Both Lam and Riak became ministers. As a usual policy of the NIF that once it absorbs a past enemy, any agreement is ignoreed. Dr. Riak was the first to realize that, and went back to the SPLM/A in early 1999, while Lam remained with the NIF, hoping there would be chang, especially after the split in the NIF in 1999. For reasons known to him, Lam remained in Khartoum until after the signature of the Machacos Frame-work agreement on July 20, 2002. Thereafter Lam realized that the train had moved on and he had to catch up with the moving train, otherwise he would be looking like Matip and the other Mililtia generals.
Third, after the signature of the Naivasha Agreement and during the well-publicized disagrement between Kiir Mayardit and Dr. Garang, Lam allied himself with Kiir Mayardit, hoping Kiir Mayardit would be able to depose Garang. He was right in that calculation, death deposed Garang and Kiir Mayardit succeeded him, and Lam was rewarded with the post of FM. If Garang were alive at the formation of the GNU, Lam could not have made it to the foreign ministry. Southerners know this fact.
Fourth, the complaint about the performance of Lam in the government is not due to incompetence but is due to his own ambition, although his friend and mentor is the head of the SPLM, Lam is working for the future leadership bid. Fifth and finally, it is the fear of absorption that is making the rank and file of the SPLM jittery that the NIF policy of absorption is happening again. I do not think that Kiir Mayardit will respond possitively to the complainants or the petitioners. Since the death of Garang, the SPLM machine has been grinding extremely and slow to a s halt, and sometimes confused. So, we should not impute too much into this complaint by the disatisfied and disgruntled members of the SPLM
(عدل بواسطة charles deng on 02-06-2006, 06:38 AM)
(عدل بواسطة charles deng on 02-06-2006, 06:45 AM)
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
فيس بوك
تويتر
انستقرام
يوتيوب
بنتيريست