South Sudan: Watching a fragile nation

[M-A Lagrange]

Three people killed in an attack in Pibor
May 27, 2010 (BOR) – Three people are dead and at least five are injured following a last week attack in Lokurnyang in Jonglei’s Pibor County, security sources said.
Speaking to Sudan Tribune from Bor, the capital of Jonglei, on Tuesday, a security official confirmed that armed men loyal to David Yauyay, the defeated legislative candidate of the United Democratic Front (UDF) carried out the attack on May 23.
The security official discussed intelligence reports on the condition of anonymity.
Other sources have stated that several other assaults blamed on followers of Mr. Yauyau have resulted in unconfirmed casualties and tensions remain high.
James Buret, a UDF member who contested and lost in the national elections in April, told the Sudan Tribune by phone from Pibor that Mr. Yauyau reactions to the electoral are unilateral.
"After the election results, everyone left for their area and whatever happens after that is not UDF’s decision," Mr. James said about Yauyau’s military complaints on alleged electoral fraud.
A source in Pibor says the number of youth supporting Yauyau is estimated at 10 but other reports put the marauding groups higher.
After attacking Lokurnyang, the group headed towards Gadiang , located between Twic East, Duk, Uror and Pibor Counties, another source claims. It appears that Mr. Yauyau is seeking to merge his men with General George Athor Deng of the SPLA who is also accused of confronting the regional army in the last few weeks.
Mr. Athor, a former deputy chief of staff in the Southern Sudan army, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), was a main rival to Jonglei’s governer, Kuol Manyang , in April’s polls but lost with a wide margin to the incumbent leader from the SPLM that rules the semi-autonomous region. Athor is on the run after being accused of attacking an army base in Dolieb Hills, Upper Nile State on April 30.
Tension is mounting in Jonglei State following the elections as defeated politicians resort to military means to address their post-election frustrations.
Equally important, the Bor – Juba road has registered increasing raids. Two people were killed last Saturday when gunmen fired at a passenger’s car. The May 22 ambush between Mongala and Geimeza comes a week after similar attack left four people dead. As a result, land transport is loose and a number of business trucks are stranded in Juba.
Jonglei State was marred with inter-tribal cattle rustling in 2009 as well as attacks on Bor—Juba road that later fueled clashes between Mundari-Bor pastoralists leaving hundreds dead in both cases. The Government of Southern Sudan vowed at the time to halt similar future incidents.
With seven months left until the referendum on self-determination in the underdeveloped south Sudan, the journey to January 2011, at the moment, is shaky.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35216


The question here is: does nonkinetic approach fuel insurgencies?
A very actual debate in deed. Especially as it seems that Mr Yauyau has more than 10 armed supporters and is linking with General Athor.
If a national force has the capacity to crush an emerging insurgency why should they not do it? We do come back to the importance of populace as clausewitzian center. The only reason for a national force to not crush an emerging insurgency being the risk of loosing populace support and for the government its legitimacy.
The real question behind being: can a COIN afford electoral fraud?
Personnally, the answer would be no. Not because it is against my principles (it is) but because it does have much larger counter productive effects than having to deal with authorities actually representative and representing population. Also, it is against Thompson principles... But I leave this for the scholars.

[M-A Lagrange]

SPLA clashes with a renegade Colonel in Unity state
May 29, 2010 (JUBA) – A renegade Colonel in the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) has clashed with the Southern Sudan army in a county called Abiem-Nhom in Unity state.
Colonel Gatluak Gai of SPLA, who was then transferred to Prisons Brigade, is reported to have been angered by the alleged elections rigging by the incumbent governor, Taban Deng Gai, in Unity state.
His declaration of violence on Friday is the second most serious incident following that of former army Deputy Chief of Staff, General George Athor Deng of Pigi county and David Yauyau of Pibor, both from Jonglei state. All the discontented voiced their rebellion on the “rigging” of the elections, though some officials in both the government and the SPLA had associated them directly with Khartoum or blame the whole issue on Khartoum.
The SPLM Secretary General Pagan Amum Okiech had earlier said that there were evidences showing that Gen. George Athor had direct link with the Khartoum government.
Although the SPLA spokesman, Major General Kuol Deim Kuol, was not heard commenting about linking Athor’s rebellion to Khartoum, Kuol has however told Miraya FM radio that the recent attack by Colonel Gatluak Gai was carried out by a group of militias sent from Khartoum.
However, another SPLA military source close to Unity state who asked to remain anonymous however explained that Colonel Gatluak is a well known SPLA officer and had been an SPLA officer like Gen. George Athor and was not sent from Khartoum as alleged.
He said Gatluak’s movement with some of his loyalists within Unity state has been monitored by the SPLA for the last three weeks. On casualties, the source added there could be higher figure than officially reported.
"The attackers did not defeat our SPLA forces but only one soldier got injured at his head after heavy gunfire exchange between our army and militias," Kuol said.
Kuol accuse the National Congress Party (NCP) of having stood behind to send militias to disturb in Unity state.
The SPLA spokesman affirmed that “at 4:45, our SPLA base at Warpiny of Abiemnhom county was attack by the forces of militias under Colonel militias Gatluak Gai, the aim is to indentify our heavy weapon position – this militias colonel with his forces was sent by Khartoum government with aim to disturb security in Unity state – one soldier at our side was wounded in his head and we don’t have more detail from our attackers side,” continued the SPLA spokesman.
Kuol noted that "We did not capture one of them in our yesterday clashes, but the motive of aggressive militias’ daily attack in Unity state is to promote political objective of the NCP in Southern Sudan - they are supporting NCP agenda and we the SPLA will just sustain our position to protect our civilians in all territory of South Sudan."
Government of Southern Sudan is currently faced with a number of rebellions following the declaration of elections results. Earlier, the former senior advisor to President Salva Kiir Mayardit, Lual Ding Wol, was reported to have expressed his discontent with the government in Juba, saying he would not accept to be part of the next government.
Lual Ding comes from Northern Bahr el Ghazal and was supporter of Gen. Dau Aturtong who went to Khartoum after losing the gubernatorial elections as another independent candidate, prompting fears that something unpleasant could be brewing in Northern Bahr el Ghazal state.
However, Kuol in his recent statement refused to make comment on General George Athor violence against SPLA forces in Jonglei state.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35237

And the fire spread all over the place.
But is the connection with NCP a reality or just something built to explain the situation and blame North?
In such situation, narrative is almost as important as reallity. Experience in other states shows that unfortunately, SPLM did not even leave room for South Sudanese alternance and opposition…

[M-A Lagrange]

First the insurgency gets organized:

Renegades coordinate attacks on South Sudan army
Three top officers who quit south Sudan’s army over alleged fraud in national elections are coordinating attacks in the oil-producing region, a renegade general said on Monday, but the army played down the threat.
“Southerners are not happy with what happened during the elections,” said George Athor, a senior general who complained of fraud after losing in the April elections and went on the run on April 30.
“I have many people who joined me, one of them is Colonel Galwak Gai and the other is David Yauyau, and we have others in other areas,” he added.
Yauyau, who told Reuters he was coordinating operations with Athor, carried out an attack in Jonglei state a week ago, forcing the United Nations to evacuate 10 staff. The south Sudan army (SPLA) said Gai attacked it in oil-rich Unity state on May 28.
“Militia commander Galwak Gai came and attacked our position,” said SPLA Spokesman Kuol Diem Kuol, adding that only one soldier was wounded but they had found two attackers’ bodies and took four prisoners.

http://www.africa-times-news.com/201...th-sudan-army/

Then SPLM is trying to cope, they cannot fight on two fronts at the same time: inside and with North

Juba forces says Sudan’s unity requires new basisMay 31, 2010 (KHARTOUM) — Juba alliance political forces agreed today that Sudan’s unity could only be maintained if the country is reshaped on new basis.
The opposition leaders and the SPLM further said the result of the referenda should be respected and implemented.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35246


The response from insurgents:

Athor says SPLM “ruling clique” can rig referendum against people’s choice
"The clique in Juba is now desperately trying to mislead public opinion that the long-awaited referendum in Southern Sudan is tied with their continuation in power. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, their very presence in power jeopardizes the credibility of the referendum itself. An illegitimate government that rigged the democratic right of the people cannot be trusted to lead the Southern Sudanese into a democratic exercise to determine their destiny," reads the statement.
"Since the SPLM ruling clique in Juba rigged the elections with impunity, they can in the same way also rig the referendum. The South cannot afford to have a Self-determination result that is in dispute. That will be a recipe for instability rather than the peaceful outcome the CPA was meant to realize," the statement continued.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35260


Basically, everybody agrees on one thing: it’s a mess in South Sudan nowadays.
To get an idea of what is the future under SPLM ruling, I recommand to read the excellent: Governance, violence and the struggle for economic regulation in South Sudan: the case of Budi County(Eastern Equatoria) from Anne Walraet (sorry, I do not have the link but it's available on the net).
Truthfully mind blowing...

[M-A Lagrange]

The question seems to be rhetorical in a country divided in 2 and actually in the middle of a peace process between the 2 parts.
But in fact, new info are putting this back in relevancy.

The appearances:

South Sudan army kills eight rebels in Unity State, pledges to crash them
June 3, 2010, (TURALEI) – The Southern Sudan army (SPLA) clashed with a renegade Colonel in Unity State killing eight of his men and pledged to crash his rebellion.
Colonel Galuak Gai is one of three SPLA officers who rebelled last April contesting the results of April elections. They accused the southern Sudan ruling party of rigging the elections. The three also said coordinating their fight against Juba government.
"Our forces have on Tuesday clashed with forces loyal to former southern police colonel, Galuak Gai, south west of Mayom County, killing eight of his men and are still following him with instructions to capture him dead or alive," SPLA spokesperson, General Kuol Deim Kuol, told Sudan Tribune, on Thursday.
Kuol disputed allegations that colonel Gai is coordinating with the former General, George Athor, who turned rebel after losing in April polls.
"All militia leaders report directly to national intelligence services in Khartoum," he said.
The spokesperson further confirmed arrest of the two SPLA officers on June 1 allegedly suspected of trying to recruit for David Yauyau of Jonglei, one of the militia leaders’ allied with Gen. Athor.
"They are suspected of trying to recruit people to go and join Yauyau," he said. They may be released if the investigation shows nothing."

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35280
And

Leaders from Murle community arrested in Juba
June 2, 2010 (JUBA) – A number of political and military leaders from the Murle community of Pibor County in Jonglei state have been arrested in the South Sudan’s capital, Juba. Mary Boyoi also explained that her uncle and others were denied to cast their ballot papers during the April elections because their names were already used by unknown individuals who used them to cast their votes.

“I know they all went to Pibor to vote. The day they were going to vote they found that their names had already been used to cast the ballot. So they left Pibor and returned to Juba. They did not involve themselves in any "rebellion".

Pibor County has recently witnessed a military standoff between the forces of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) and supporters of David Yauyau, a former independent candidate who was angered by the alleged rigging of elections results and reportedly coordinated the move with the renegade former SPLA Deputy Chief of General Staff, George Athor Deng.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35272

Here are the small pitty facts which change everything:
From Global Witness:
Middle East Oil companies are conducting oil exploration in North Dafur
http://www.globalwitness.org/media_l...oil_exploratio

And from Romandi news, unfortunatelly in French:
Sudan : North and South may increase their oil production

http://www.romandie.com/infos/news2/...6.r4gma52q.asp

And the "surprising/unexpected" news :

Peace partners agree to "persuade" South Sudanese to vote for unity
"In accordance [with] the aforementioned commitments, the NCP and SPLM have agreed on the following general directives for the programme of the next government…implementation of the remaining provisions of the CPA in spirit of partnership and responsibility with the aim of contributing to persuade the people of Southern Sudan for voluntary unity," the agreement reads in part.
The two parties also agreed to improve institutional arrangements and carry out development in the South for the next seven months in addition to working to implement a media campaign with the aim to popularize the CPA throughout the country.
The agreement came as a surprise to many political analysts and observers who have criticized it as the work of the NCP to divide the SPLM leadership on the issues to do with self-determination and its two options of unity and secession.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35281

As I was posting previously, latest research in the field show that North South war in Sudan is all about economical resources domination, from both sides. May be not what Garang fought for but it is what reality shows.
It is also part of the big game. As Bill C commented on the article Africa’s irregular security threat, Africa came back as one of the most strategic place in the world nowadays as everybody is trying to get out of the Middle East energy dependency. And, by the way, Sudan is the number 1 oil source for China.
So, unlike the article from Sudan Tribune states, backing up unity is not so much a surprise for analyst. It is even the only solution. The one that many who followed this war for long did not really want to see as they putted too many efforts in crushing North.
In fact, what tends to be is a common interest for both parties to enjoy oil incomes. China is basically the main investor in oil field and Sudan the main oil supplier from China with 60 000 b/day on a 120 000 b/day imports. The oil refineries and pipeline are located in North and linking with Port Sudan. There are projects of pipe line between South and Kenya, just like the construction of Lamu port in Kenya. But this are long term planning and, here, we are talking about immediate enjoyment of oil revenues. Let’s be practical on that one.
But also, this really highlights one of the very deep root trigger of insurgency process both on birth and ending. If the 60 and 70 “insurgencies” were in fact liberation wars from oppressed groups against external powers (most of the time). The 21 century “insurgencies” and even the late 20 century onces, at least in Africa, are definitively economically protracted. And some how, this is may be why the old recipe of COIN political settlement is not working.
The 60 insurgencies were based on the raise of individual rights empowerment. Individuals had rights and as such they had the right to rebel and build new nations out of any colonial power.
The 2000 insurgencies are struggles to control state administrations to access not individual rights but individual enrichment. People’s interest and rights are no more the leading engine of those movements. Somehow, it is the counter balance reaction to those “60 insurgencies” which were revolutionary and counter revolutionary wars at that time from states trying to re ensure their hand on citizens. Like South Sudan rebellion started to defend southerners right to have a recognized different culture and equality of rights and is ending now in a pity struggle to share oil revenues between 2 barely democratic political parties.

[JMA]

... Like South Sudan rebellion started to defend southerners right to have a recognized different culture and equality of rights and is ending now in a pity struggle to share oil revenues between 2 barely democratic political parties.

Yes this is a sad development. But had the 'world' prevented the ongoing genocide in South Sudan and separated the North and South into two states with a clear border the oil issue would have been less of a problem.

Sadly it proves yet again the fatal flaws in the UN. And now China has been drawn in due to its oil hunger.

400,000 dead and 2,500,000 displaced should make everyone hang their heads in shame... especially when we all said it would not be allowed to happen again.

[M-A Lagrange]

Hey JMA,

I believe you are talking about the "genocide" in Darfur and not in South Sudan.
I do not want to play the devil advocate here, but Bashir has been found suspect only of war crimes and war against humanity. The difference is light, thine and for some even just rhetorical but has its importance.
Saying this, what I found sad into Sudan and Darfur adventure is that Africa has not been capable to make its proof she is capable of taking care of herself in a decent way. I like too much this continent for not being ashamed to see how African politicians have been playing around to not send troops for UNAMID.
I have the tendency to support AU understanding of the situation: a division of Sudan would do more harm than good. And for exactly the same reason that AU president, Mr PING: if Sudan partition all countries will blow up and Africa will be a mosaic of small nonviable countries ran by crazy ex war lords…
Having said so, I support Uganda and South Africa courageous position on Bashir and the ICT. Africa must end the "love" story with crimes against human rights because African peaders are different.

[JMA]

Having said so, I support Uganda and South Africa courageous position on Bashir and the ICT. Africa must end the "love" story with crimes against human rights because African peaders are different.

Just when you thought there was a glimmer of hope coming out of Africa your hopes get dashed. Africa has a way of doing that.

Uganda invites al-Bashir to summit

"Uganda has backtracked on a decision to bar the Sudanese president from the African Union (AU) summit in Kampala next month, saying Omar al-Bashir, who is wanted for war crimes, has actually been invited."

and...

A confusing message from South Africa:

South Africa may arrest Bashir if attends World Cup

"South Africa has invited Sudan's Omar al-Bashir to the continent's first World Cup along with the rest of Africa's leadership, but will arrest him if he takes up the invitation, President Jacob Zuma said."

...you go figure!

[M-A Lagrange]

From JMA:

Just when you thought there was a glimmer of hope coming out of Africa your hopes get dashed. Africa has a way of doing that.

Well, Africa teaches you how to be patient... Cause after too much rain comes too much sun

Southern Army clears post election rebellion in Unity state
The Sudan people’s Liberation Army (The SPLA) has on Tuesday said it militarily cleared remnants of the forces allegedly loyal to former southern police officer who turned rebel after April elections, Colonel Gatluak Gai in the southern state of unity.
Colonel Gai whose forces have been on a run following an increase in military engagements recently, by southern army against his men, clashed again with SPLA forces, North West of Mayom County, unity state, on Monday 7, killing 21 members of his loyalists and captured 32 others.
General Kuol Deim Kuol, SPLA spokesperson in Juba said his forces have completely cleared post election rebellion in southern state of Unity and pledged readiness to defend local population in the area against any aggression by armed groups inside southern territory.
"Our forces have cleared remnants of colonel Gai. They do no longer exist in southern territory. Gai escaped with few of his loyalists and is currently outside SPLA controlled territories," General Kuol said adding his forces remain ready for any military engagement should he return as a rebellion army.
"He is out of the SPLA controlled areas. He is said to have run northward of Mayom County to no man land. That area is a complete bush under Joint integrated units. It is not SPLA territory," he said.
William Twil, an ex- Unity state advisor who is likely to maintain the same advisory position, in the upcoming government, confirmed the clash and seconded military option, saying it is a resort of attempts to bringing peaceful settlement to post elections grievances.
"Nobody had wanted a military option but situation created by individuals has brought it. What is the reason of killing your own people while there are best ways to settle differences," he asked.
Major Peter Both, SPLA logistics officer, in Unity state capital of Bentiu equally confirmed clash between southern army and forces loyal to renegade police officer.
"They have clashed again yesterday and our forces have cleared them off," he said.
"They were badly defeated; they also captured additional members from them this time and now out of SPLA controlled areas," he said adding that the southern army will not tolerate groups with intention to creating instability.
The SPLA will not tolerate groups operating outside legal system using arms to destabilize security of our people. They will be militarily confronted to show them where they belong as our forces have shown them today, Major Peter confidently said.
Three former leading members of the southern Sudan army rebelled after April elections accusing GOSS authorities of rigging their vote.
General george Athor Deng who is in Jonglei, General Gatluak Gai of SPLA, in Unity state, and David Yauyau of Pibor, said last week they are coordinating their activities in the areas.
General Kuol said SPLA forces outside Malakal town; have on Sunday 06, clashed with armed groups accused to have been behind the killing of Shilluk Paramount chief, Peter Oyath, in Panyikang County, Upper Nile State, in May 22, 2010.
"Our forces clashed with SPLM-DC affiliated armed group not far away from Malakal international airport. They fought North West of the airport, exactly west of river Nile.
They have killed seven of their members and have captured alive three of their members with arms, General Kuol said. "These people have been the cause of recent insecurity in the town and beyond," he adds.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35332

[JMA]

"The SPLA will not tolerate groups operating outside legal system using arms to destabilize security of our people. They will be militarily confronted to show them where they belong as our forces have shown them today, Major Peter confidently said."

Always fascinated when a one time 'liberation army' starts preaching about the rule of law.

[M-A Lagrange]

The best way to end an insurgency:

South Sudan ruling party losses Jonglei’s election rerun
Provisional results from the High Election Committee of Jonglei State projected the victory of Kuol Bol Ayom , an Independent candidate over Daniel Deng Kut, an SPLM candidate for the Athoc North State seat.
Kuol Bol scored 9448 votes to Deng Kut’s 3387 votes. Two other candidates, Buol Lual ,an independent and Mayen Kur , an NCP, withdrew from the race but still gathered below 50 votes combined since their names were on ballot papers.
The final results will be announced at the National Elections Commission (NEC) in Khartoum.
Kuol Bol victory adds a second tally to independent lawmakers in the SPLM-controlled assembly in Jonglei State.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35337

Jonglei State is one of the most insecure states in South Sudan. But it is also one of the less strategical: it is not long the North/South border and not long the Kenya and Uganda border. So redoing the elections will not affect the SPLA logistical roads or pre deployment long the North/South border.
A win/win exercise if we can call it that way. It also goes directly into the line of the Malaysian COIN: you give to the people what they want and then cut the grass under insurgents feets.

JMA, just for you :

Sudan tells South Africa to stop ’cheap propaganda’
"I don’t think it’s correct to say, ’If the president of Sudan comes to South Africa, we will arrest him.’ It looks like cheap propaganda" Al-Sharif was quoted as saying by Pretoria News.
"The president will not come to South Africa without an invitation. He is not a tourist. He is a president" he added.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35345

Apparently, it is hard to live in the shoes of a chief...

[JMA]

The best way to end an insurgency:

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35337

Jonglei State is one of the most insecure states in South Sudan. But it is also one of the less strategical: it is not long the North/South border and not long the Kenya and Uganda border. So redoing the elections will not affect the SPLA logistical roads or pre deployment long the North/South border.
A win/win exercise if we can call it that way. It also goes directly into the line of the Malaysian COIN: you give to the people what they want and then cut the grass under insurgents feets.

If you just make the concessions the insurgents demand ("give the people what they want") then they win, yes?

[JMA]

JMA, just for you :


http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35345

Apparently, it is hard to live in the shoes of a chief...

The newspaper headline read:

Sudan tells South Africa to stop ’cheap propaganda’

South Africa should have been more upfront and direct with this matter (as should Uganda).

Something like:

"All heads of state of African countries have been invited to attend the opening ceremony of the 2010 World Cup as a blanket diplomatic courtesy.

In addition South Africa wishes to confirm that as a signatory to the ICC remains bound to exercise and enforce any summonses and/or arrest warrants issued by that organisation. There can be no exceptions to this."

[M-A Lagrange]

Two governors of Sudan borders states call to strengthen ancestral ties
"There can never be development if any given area remains under security threats all the time. There can be never free movement of the local people between the two areas if security remains a major concern. There can never be regular business transaction between the two areas if there are bandits on commercial lines stopping and looting people and of course there can never be better relations if there are illegal armed groups on each border side," added Governor Anei, emphasizing that security is a major priority to his administration.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35367

Cattle raids affect relations between Unity and Lakes states - official
June 12, 2010 (RUMBEK) — The Commissioner of Rumbek’s North County of Lakes State, Isaac Mayek Noah, said that his county’s relationship with the neighboring state of Unity is deteriorating due to frequent cattle raids.
In the last three months, at least 19 people were killed and 26 others were seriously wounded by Unity State cattle looters.
Commissioner Noah told Sudan Tribune that over six thousand cows were looted in a 3 months period by cattle raiders from Unity State and not a single one was returned to its owners in Maper, Rumbek North by Unity state authorities.
He also added that he conducted voluntary mediation between Unity state and his county, but the Government of Unity State failed to respond positively on returning looted cows.
Commissioner Noah noted that since his appointment through a GOSS presidential decree on 7/12/2009 ,he has achieved disarmament in Rumbek North County and all arms collected from armed civilians were handed to SPLA barracks.
"I collected AK47s guns making the total 460," said Commissioner Noah.
Noah accused Unity state of not being disarmed by the SPLA and his county is disarmed leaving the civilian without protection.
However, Noah appreciates his county’s relation with Warrap state saying that since we signed a peace document between Rumbek North (Maper) County and Tonj East County, there is no any report of cattle raids reported between Tonji East county of Warrap state and Rumbek North (Maper) county of Lakes state .
"We are in a peaceful atmosphere with Warrap state and our main threat is Unity state cattle raiders." added Commissioner Noah.
Tonj East County of Warrap state and Rumbek North (Maper) County of Lakes state signed a cattle raiders peace document on March 23, 2010 in Wunlit under the mediation of PACT- Sudan organization.
Noah confirmed that over 619 were killed in last month.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35365

Building unity in South Sudan it self is not for tomorrow…
The main problem is that each states acts as it was an independent country with local tribes ruled only by custom...
The other problematic is:
After 25 years of war (for the second civil war) and a youth with no education and only skills an AK, encourage by a social pressure (from elders and women) to prove they are a man by killing some people and ruling authorities who control the illegal trade... What do we do?

[jmm99]

This:

from JMA
If you just make the concessions the insurgents demand ("give the people what they want") then they win, yes?

is true - IFF the end state desired by the insurgents is explicitly incorporated in their demands. In short, the insurgent leadership, in that situation, does not manipulate the slogans, but explicitly lays out its desired end state.

However, let us take our Com brethren of the two major insurgencies of my youth - China and Vietnam. The end goals (ideology) for Mao and Ho-Giap never varied - a Communist government in each country. On the other hand, they used a variety of slogans which did not reflect that Communist end state. E.g., land reform (redistribution of farms), anti-imperialism (end foreign control over trade, etc.), and provide equality in class opportunities (put the rural peasants on a equal opportunity footing with urban bourgeoisie).

Thus, non-Coms could join in a United Front whose slogans were not explicitly Communistic. So also, the incumbant governments in both China and Vietman could have satisfied some of the slogans (e.g., land reform, nationalism, equal opportunity) without giving the insurgent leadership (Coms) what they really wanted. In neither case, was the incumbant government willing to make those concessions.

Regards

Mike

[M-A Lagrange]

This:
is true - IFF the end state desired by the insurgents is explicitly incorporated in their demands. In short, the insurgent leadership, in that situation, does not manipulate the slogans, but explicitly lays out its desired end state.

However, let us take our Com brethren of the two major insurgencies of my youth - China and Vietnam. The end goals (ideology) for Mao and Ho-Giap never varied - a Communist government in each country. On the other hand, they used a variety of slogans which did not reflect that Communist end state. E.g., land reform (redistribution of farms), anti-imperialism (end foreign control over trade, etc.), and provide equality in class opportunities (put the rural peasants on a equal opportunity footing with urban bourgeoisie).

Thus, non-Coms could join in a United Front whose slogans were not explicitly Communistic. So also, the incumbant governments in both China and Vietman could have satisfied some of the slogans (e.g., land reform, nationalism, equal opportunity) without giving the insurgent leadership (Coms) what they really wanted. In neither case, was the incumbant government willing to make those concessions.

Regards

Mike

Mikes assertion is quite true. The narrative is as important for insurgents than for the loyalists. In the case of South Sudan, insurgents are absolutely not sophisticated. They claim power on the base of electoral frauds which were most of the time obvious or they are just not happy to not have been elected. So either you buy them or you crush them.

In the case of Malaysia, the promise of independence came very early so it really did cut the grass under the feet of insurgents because they did not have the capacity to elaborate their discourse.
In the case of Algeria, it was almost the same. The promise to revise the status of the indigenes came too late.
In Irak, the delay in being in position to provide efficient civil peace and recover basic services as electricity played an important role.
For A-Stan, I do not know.
But timing is one key of preventing the situation to go bad and unmanageable. COIN comes as the response but should rather come as a preventive measure. But if you do so, then you probably have to focus most of your manpower to the hold phase. It is probably a question of equilibrium between your offensive needs and your hold capacity.
By the way, my experience in Sudan tells me that you cannot afford to be cheap if you try to rebuild a country. That just does not work because the 5% of incompetent and the 30% of not so competent people are becoming 35% of 10 people and it becomes just ineffective.

[M-A Lagrange]

South Sudan army and renegade general clash in Jonglei State
June 16, 2010 (KHARTOUM) – The southern Sudan army killed 10 rebels loyal to General George Athor and lost three soldiers after fierce fighting in Jonglei state, the SPLA stated Wednesday.
The fighting took place on Tuesday when a SPLA search team composed of 35 members discovered the hideout of the renegade general in Khorflus area, Jonglei State, according to statements by the SPLA spokesperson Kuol Diem Kuol.
George Athor Deng, a former deputy chief of Staff in South Sudan army, rebelled after his defeat in the gubernatorial election in Jonglei state. Recently he said coordinating with other rebels in Jonglei and Unity States.
Athor called for peace talks to end clashes between his forces and regional army and the dissolution of the recently elected government of Southern Sudan. He is also demanding resignation of Jonglei Governor-elect Kuol Manyang Juuk alongside threats to attack Bor town, the state capital.
The Southern Sudanese authorities declined mediation by the UN mission in Sudan and brushed aside his demands. Since the SPLA is tracking down Athor preferring to deal militarily with his rebellion.
The SPLA said that supporters of renegade senior officer George Athor, who were captured on Sunday, had provided the southern army with his location.
The general Athor, in a message to Sudan Tribune sent through a reliable contact said he only lost five of his men in yesterday fighting "in a place called Ngong near to Korfulous". He also claimed they counted 40 dead from the SPLA troops.
He further said they captured 25 AK-47’s and 4 PKMs from the SPLA.
The renegade general dismissed statement by the spokesperson of the Southern Sudan army about the capture of 13 of his men and radio equipment.
"These were civilian youth from the area and not our soldiers" he said. Athor also denies that SPLA took any radio equipment.
On June 4, the SPLA attacked the positions of forces loyal to former southern Sudan police officer in Unity State, Colonel Galuak Gai, who turned rebel shortly after April elections.
The SPLA spokesperson said today they are hunting Gen. Athor adding they expected more fighting with him. However he insisted on the southern Sudan determination to end this critical situation six months before the referendum on self determination.
"We will pursue him until he surrenders and if he refuses we will kill him," Kuol added.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35414

The response to General Athor rebellion is in the pure line of Wilf irregular war approach.
As the rebel Gen. Athor refused all honorable propositions and started to either give idea or rally other trouble makers, the SPLM and SPLA had 2 combined actions on political and military level.
On political level: they ran new elections and admitted the new results, even if the SPLM lost his dominant position.
On military: first the SPLA isolated Athor. Then they crushed the possible Athor allies and other trouble makers. Finally they crush Athor.

Naturally, there are other issues that could have been used by the insurgents if they had time to develop a complex narrative support (Mao Level 1 of “guerrilla”: propaganda) as the civilian disarment and other land issues which are fuelling the populace eager against the SPLM/A. As Mike (JMM) pointed it out, this phase is capital because it would have allowed Athor to rally many others around him, even if they disagree with his political agenda. Fortunately, in South Sudan, the things are not that much elaborated.

And personnaly, I think that it is the first level of critic you can make to Wilf. This worked because first Athor had no real political agenda, therefore no narrative to rally populace. With much more complexe and elaborated opponant who would have taken time to build a narrative, then the solution might not be than easy. (there are several example of the contrary, I admit it, as in South America or may be in in Thayland).

The second level of critic I see is the fact that: yes SPLM/A cut the grass under the feet of Athor and crushed his rebellion timely,but they did not respond to the root causes of the attempt of rebellion. And that is where with Wilf we do concur: it is not a military job but a political and civil administration job. But if you do not address the root causes, then you still have a high insurgency potential (CF Bobworld sheme). So you are vulnerable according to irregular war theory as you did not win the political war.

And thirdly, even if SPLA claim they had proof of Athor support from outside, apparently it was not that strong. And that is also may be the third level of critic you can do to Wilf.
In the case of South Sudan, the issue is addressed but ti is complex as you have a lot of players in the game (USA, China, Arab League, Iran… Name it).

America urged to withdraw military aid to Sudan
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article35409

External support is vital for insurgents at the early stages. If they have some, then the military solution is not effective as, to reuse the medical analogy, it is as a cancer: you can remove the infected portions, it would grow again. DRC is a perfect exemple of this problematic with the small armed groups which are pacified and disarmed one day and the next one: an external player (a State or a criminal group) will provide them the means to rearm and all the circus starts again.

And by the way, what ever disagreement and agreements we may have on theoritical/moral points: no retired UK soldier living in the patriachal land has been tortured by single man or team to writte this post
The use/reference of any SWJ members is a mark of respect for all the expertise,experience and knowledge of each individual cited in that post.

[William F. Owen]

The response to General Athor rebellion is in the pure line of Wilf irregular war approach.

While I am somewhat troubled that my doctrine or opinions may have been so mis-understood, I'll have to read this several times to understand it, but

a.) Was armed force used against armed force? - as part of a policy.
b.) Did that create the condition where by the rebels were unable to advance their agenda via violence?
If yes, then Aye!

no retired UK soldier living in the patriachal land has been tortured by single man or team to writte this post

A.) I am not retired. I'm only 47!
B.) It's the land of Partachia, Nothing to do with "patriachal".
If you have never stood in a traffic jam because there is donkey sleeping in the road, you will never understand. The Partach people are pushy, noisy, impatient. They never plan, and always take short cuts. The rule is there are no rules. If you want to check that a sandwich is fresh, - take a bite! Your car has a horn? Use it!!
...unless you live it, you'll never know!

[M-A Lagrange]

Funny, the place you are looks like a United Nations camp in somewhere hot. Including the donkey.

a.) Was armed force used against armed force? - as part of a policy.
b.) Did that create the condition where by the rebels were unable to advance their agenda via violence?
If yes, then Aye!

Actually yes, as it is said in the article quoted.
My only points were that it was possible because:
a) insurgents were not organised (no real coordination) and without populace support (no propagand)
b) indurgents had very low external support
but
c) it does not respond to the core roots of the political problems which created the condition for a group of insurgent to emerge.

And I think that is why it worked. I tend to believe that in other context where you have:
a) organised insurgents with effective propagand and military coordination
b) insurgent with strong external support (weapons, ammunitions, advisor, money...)
c) Government not responding to the main population claims

The use of force does not work. And this what ever you are effective on the military level. As in Algeria for exemple.

The key being to identify the population legitimate and reasonable claims that a government can respond to. The big problem being that if they do not respond to it, it is because they tend to believe that the claims are not legitimate or may endanger them. But to this, the military cannot do anything.

[William F. Owen]

Funny, the place you are looks like a United Nations camp in somewhere hot. Including the donkey.

The UN Camps are over the fence.

The use of force does not work. And this what ever you are effective on the military level. As in Algeria for exemple.

Really? 3,500 of recorded human history presents overwhelming evidence that it does.
Algeria? The FLN won by killing 28,000 French soldiers.
The Somalis got the US out of Mogadishu by killing 18 and wounding 70. The Vietnamese killed 57,000 US troops and got the US to abandon Vietnam.
AQ could not kill enough Americans to get the Americans to leave Iraq.

[M-A Lagrange]

Really? 3,500 of recorded human history presents overwhelming evidence that it does.
Algeria? The FLN won by killing 28,000 French soldiers.
The Somalis got the US out of Mogadishu by killing 18 and wounding 70. The Vietnamese killed 57,000 US troops and got the US to abandon Vietnam.
AQ could not kill enough Americans to get the Americans to leave Iraq.

Wilf, you are twisting the question , but I should have been more specific : it does not work to win a counter insurgency war.

The Algeria exemple is exactly that: France did ask them to fight 2 WW and never responded to legitimate demands from the people. So you create the conditions for an insurgency. And by waiting, you create the conditions for the insurgents to get organised and develop their narrative to rally a larger portion of population to them than the ones who do really concure with their political objective.
Taking DRC exemple back: as long as there is an external player who is paying insurgents, there will be no rest in the area for the Kinshasa government. (Not mentioning that as they do not do the first point: respond to people legitimate demands and even less their troops demand, they do shoot a bullet in their foot every morning...).

The Sudan exemple is at contrary the perfect illustration of what you preach:
1) try to isolate the insurgents on a soft manner (in the Sudan case buy the insurgent chief with a high ranked post)
2) if that does not work: adress immediatly the population legitimate demand to win the political battle
3) isolate the insurgent forces
4) crush the insurgents

You have won on the 2 level of "revolutionary war"/irregular war: the political level and the military one.
If we extend that to the COIN theory and shift of battle field from politic to governance... The results may be fuzzy if you do not sustain you efforts defined at political level: adress people legitimate demands to win the battle of governance and build trust among the people on the government legitimacy.

But I know that you have difficulties to buy the last part.