Cutler & Katel 1 Praja Katel & Kylee Cutler ENGL 2010 Steven Holland 13 April 2014 Political

Spectrum of Equality in South Sudan In such a diverse nation, is it acceptable to separate the country further to accommodate the clashing groups or must they make efforts to coexist within their land? Could the lack of dialogue in this nation be a conditioned response? Our peace, our land, our oil, our liberty, stated the Sudan Peoples Liberation Army. The SPLA formed a conservative movement that played a pivotal role during the second Sudanese civil war. There are essential patterns that surround the past issue between Northern and Southern Sudan; the roles of political figures as well as how theyre actions influence the perceptions of the Sudanese people should be addressed. Civilians often speak of sociopolitical injustice, particularly through unequal representation in government and distribution of the nations power. South Sudan struggles to have fair delineation in government and balanced powers over resources due to the countrys nationalistic constraints, which reflects heavily onto the inhabitants. There is also a clear absence of effective communication among officials, causing civilians to project their frustration onto one another, becoming violent over livestock. South Sudans government has the power to influence the nationalistic constraints that prevent the coexistence of the diverse body of people. When officials are prepared to productively communicate, a solution has great potential to flourish along with trust. We assert that the past solution of segregating land should not be pursued, but that coexistence and

Cutler & Katel 2 dialogue begins with fair distribution of power and privilege across the nation and an unbiased political system. This means that no differing culture in the country is favored over any others. Social classes, ethnicity, resources and livestock all weigh on the conflict in Sudan, but this stems from the examples placed forth by the countrys leaders. The reasoning behind our claim centers on dealings among the people in South Sudan. Rumors of accused coups between the current Dinka president, Salva Kiir, and the former Vice President, Riek Machar sparks controversy among the predominant tribes, Dinka and Nuer. The Nuer Machar was accused of being a rebel leader, whereas Kiir was accused of nearing dictatorship. These vague disclosures lead us to believe that conflicting opinions has disintegrated communication in office entirely, therefore setting a poor example for civilians involved in the civil war. The progressive aspiration of the people is to be governed by an equally representative political system. The differing ethnicity in office has become associated with the political discrepancies to inhabitants of South Sudan, which has encouraged nationalistic chaos. The governments poor relational skill is not the only influence let loose on the Dinka and Nuer tribes. Biased distributions of power in general fuel the vexation among them. For instance, the government is heavily Dinka but the Nuers mostly run the oil industry, causing civilians to project their violent impulses onto each other over livestock. Despite the seemingly bisected issue of Dinka v. Nuer, there are other tribes: Derman, Odgaard, and Sjaastad. South Sudanese politicians should not follow the same course of action by segregating the cultures. When the Muslim northern Sudan fought among the Christian southern Sudan, dividing the two appeared to be a reasonably easy fix, but proved ineffective as of this current civil war. Narrow minded leadership cannot accommodate such a diverse group of people with differing values and

Cutler & Katel 3 beliefs. In short, in order to avoid as much conflict as possible, compromise must be achieved to enable fair society and equality. Its often said that in order to receive a reward, you must make some sacrifices; you give in order to receive. In closing, our position states that South Sudans conflict must be handled on an executive level in order to achieve results. Specifically, we feel that the nations government has set poor examples in terms of conflict resolution and has not proven to be in favor of the civilians best interest. A square off between two well-known politicians, President Kiir and ExVice Machar, has struck the public as being solely ethnically targeted, despite whether or not the issues stemmed from opposing tactics or values. The lack of resolution in government has taught people in the villages that power and zealotry are more conducive than coexistence, compromise and empathy. The convenient and ineffective fix should not be repeated. Differing groups of people must learn to cohabitate the world because there is no escaping everyone who does not share your lifestyle or set of beliefs. A statement that can be applied across any conflict would be that you must give some to get some; meaning that we do not always have a win-win situation on our hands, but whats important is collaboration and dialogue to work towards the optimally reasonable solution.