By Diing Deng Mou, elected WLC Leadership Council member.
At precisely 7:59 PM local time, yesterday, the city of Juba was thrown into chaos as gunfire
erupted in the residential area near the Nimule Resort Hotel and Thongpiny. What should have
been an ordinary evening for residents turned into chaos as gunfire shattered the calm all over the
city of Juba. The incident is linked to an attempt by the military to forcefully arrest the former
spy chief General Akol Koor Kuc, which has left an indeterminate number of lives and
properties lost, sparking widespread panic in the South Sudanese capital. While the exact toll of
lives and property lost remains unknown, the event has exposed deeper issues threatening the
nation’s shared security—unchecked militarization and loyalty to individuals over institutional
principles.
The Incident Unfolds
The turmoil began when the Chief of Military Intelligence, General Marshall Stephen, acting on
orders allegedly from President Salva Kiir, attempted to relocate Gen. Akol from house arrest to
an undisclosed prison. The operation faced resistance from Akol’s loyalists, resulting in a violent
confrontation. The presidential guard, known as the Tiger Division, intervened to quell the
unrest. While the immediate fighting has ceased, it remains unclear whether Gen. Akol has been
apprehended or managed to evade capture. The lack of clear communication from authorities has
only deepened the uncertainty surrounding the incident. For now, the situation appears to have
been contained, but its implications for South Sudan’s fragile stability linger ominously.
Eyewitness accounts indicate that the streets surrounding the Nimule Resort Hotel were littered
with broken glass and debris as security forces cordoned off the area. Families fled their homes,
fearing for their lives as bullets flew indiscriminately. “We heard loud gunshots and immediately
turned off all the lights in our house. It was terrifying,” said a resident of Thongpiny who wished
to remain anonymous. Despite efforts to restore calm, the night left an indelible scar on the
community.
Fear and Panic Grip Juba
The reverberations of last night’s events extend beyond the immediate vicinity of the skirmish.
Residents in nearby neighborhoods recount a night of terror, with families barricading
themselves indoors, unsure whether they would see the morning. Streets that once bustled with
life now bear the marks of destruction and abandonment, symbolizing a growing sense of
insecurity.
Reports of casualties remain vague, but the psychological toll on Juba’s residents is undeniable.
Parents worry for their children’s safety, and businesses shuttered their doors amid the
uncertainty. For a city already grappling with the scars of war and instability, this incident is a
grim reminder of the fragility of peace.
Militarization and the Danger of Divided Loyalties
The incident underscores a deeper systemic issue: the militarization of Juba and the
unprofessionalism of its armed forces. The military in South Sudan has long been criticized for
its loyalty to individuals rather than the greater good. This pattern of allegiance makes the armed
forces susceptible to manipulation, often placing political interests above national security and
public safety.
Last night’s gunfight was not just a clash of weapons but a manifestation of this dangerous
reality. The fact that loyalists of Gen. Akol Koor could resist a presidential directive and engage
in armed confrontation highlights the fragmented nature of South Sudan’s security apparatus.
Such divisions within the military threaten the very fabric of national security, leaving civilians
to bear the brunt of the chaos.
The militarization of Juba is not new. Over the years, the city has seen an increased presence of
armed forces, with military convoys and checkpoints becoming a common sight. However, this
show of force has not translated into improved security. Instead, it has deepened public fear and
mistrust. Soldiers, often aligned with rival factions within the government, are perceived as
enforcers of personal agendas rather than protectors of the people.
The lack of professionalism within the ranks exacerbates the situation. The loyalty of many
soldiers lies with individuals—be it President Kiir, Gen. Akol, or other power players—rather
than the constitution or the broader good of the nation. This fractured allegiance erodes the
military’s credibility and fuels a cycle of violence that leaves civilians paying the heaviest price.
A Grim Reflection on Leadership
Gen. Akol’s tenure as the head of the National Security Service (NSS) was marked by
widespread human rights abuses. Under his orders, countless South Sudanese were jailed,
tortured, or disappeared, leaving behind a legacy of trauma and mistrust. While many may feel
his current predicament is a form of poetic justice, others question the wisdom of pursuing him
further, especially in such a high-risk manner.
Critics argue that both Gen. Akol and President Kiir share responsibility for South Sudan’s
current plight. Their alliance, built on consolidating power through fear and repression, has left
the country divided and impoverished. The fallout from their fractured relationship now
threatens to destabilize the capital further, with ordinary citizens caught in the crosshairs of a
battle they neither started nor benefited from.
The Need for Institutional Reform
The events of last night highlight an urgent need for institutional reform within South Sudan’s
security apparatus. A professional military, loyal to the constitution rather than individuals, is
essential for lasting peace. This requires comprehensive reforms that prioritize training,
accountability, and depoliticization of the armed forces.
Moreover, the government must address the root causes of militarization, including economic
disparities and a lack of opportunities for youth. Investing in education, job creation, and
community development can provide alternatives to joining armed factions, thereby reducing the
pool of recruits for militarized conflicts.
A Call for Caution and Enlightened Leadership
As Juba wakes to assess the full impact of last night’s events, a clear message emerges: South
Sudan cannot afford more bloodshed. The country, already strained by years of civil war,
poverty, and corruption, must avoid further destabilization.
For many, the most pressing concern is the safety of security personnel caught in the middle of
these power plays. A resident lamented, “Why should our sons and daughters in uniform risk
their lives for individuals who have brought nothing but suffering to this country? They deserve
better.”
Indeed, the military’s role in such politically charged incidents is critical. Security forces must
prioritize protecting citizens over serving as pawns in power struggles. South Sudan’s leaders,
too, bear a responsibility to resolve their disputes without endangering the lives of civilians and
soldiers alike.
The people of South Sudan deserve leaders who prioritize the collective good over personal
rivalries. The country’s security forces must resist being drawn into power struggles that
undermine their primary duty of protecting the nation.
This incident serves as a wake-up call for the international community to renew its focus on
South Sudan. Diplomatic pressure and support for reforms can help steer the nation away from
the brink of chaos.
The Way Forward
The shooting incident in Juba is a wake-up call for South Sudan. It highlights the urgent need to
address the underlying issues of militarization, divided loyalties, and the politicization of security
forces. More importantly, it underscores the human cost of these power struggles—lives lost,
homes destroyed, and the dreams of young students deferred.
The road ahead is fraught with challenges, but the lessons of last night must not be ignored. The
people of South Sudan deserve a future where security is a shared responsibility, politics is a
platform for progress, and the military serves the greater good rather than personal ambitions.
As the dust settles, the question remains: will South Sudan seize this moment to address its
systemic challenges, or will it continue down a path of division and conflict? The answer will
shape the country’s future, for better or worse.
