Mahmoud Akot Akok, a France-based South Sudanese pro-democracy activist - Courtesy

A robust political opposition is essential to any government system, playing a critical role in maintaining balance and accountability. However, in South Sudan, it appears that the opposition has yet to reach the level of political maturity needed to lead an effective democratic transition.

Internal divisions, security challenges, and ongoing armed conflicts have left the opposition fragmented and unable to present a sustainable political alternative.

The roots of opposition in South Sudan are historically tied to the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), originally a liberation movement that fought against the regime in Khartoum.

After gaining independence, the SPLM transitioned into the ruling party under President Salva Kiir Mayardit. However, internal conflicts within the movement soon surfaced, particularly between President Kiir and his Vice President, Riek Machar.

These tensions led to the outbreak of a devastating civil war in December 2013. Despite several peace agreements between the warring factions, the peace has remained fragile, with armed conflicts and mutual accusations of corruption and mismanagement dominating the political landscape.

One of the major challenges facing the opposition in South Sudan is the lack of a well-organized and cohesive political structure.

While several armed groups and opposition parties exist, many lack a broad popular base or the ability to present clear, alternative political programs.

Frequent splits within opposition parties, particularly within the SPLM-in-Opposition (SPLM-IO) led by Riek Machar, highlight the absence of a unified vision or comprehensive strategy for change.

Other groups, such as the National Salvation Front and various armed factions, rely more on military strength than political legitimacy, further preventing them from offering viable political solutions.

– Kin-driven politics –

Politics in South Sudan is often driven by personal relationships and tribal loyalties rather than through formal political institutions.

Political alliances are frequently formed based on ethnic and tribal connections, which undermines the ability to build a true opposition that is based on national agendas.

These tribal loyalties also fuel ongoing internal conflicts within the opposition itself, as leaders seek to solidify their positions by aligning with their ethnic groups rather than working towards a unified national interest.

Another complicating factor is regional and international interference in South Sudan’s political affairs. Neighbouring countries and external powers often seek to influence the situation to serve their interests.

This interference exacerbates divisions within the opposition, as external forces exploit political rivalries by backing one faction over another, thus undermining local efforts to build a unified and effective opposition.

One of the most significant signs of an immature opposition is the absence of a clear and comprehensive political vision. The opposition in South Sudan tends to focus on criticizing the government and calling for its downfall without offering practical solutions to the country’s challenges, such as economic crisis, corruption, or ethnic violence.

There is no clear plan for building a state based on the rule of law, social justice, or sustainable development.

Meanwhile, the government, led by Salva Kiir, prioritizes security and maintaining control over addressing political and social issues, further complicating the opposition’s ability to influence change.

Security challenges are a significant factor contributing to the weakness of the political opposition in South Sudan. Ongoing armed conflicts and a lack of security make it difficult for political parties to operate freely or build strong coalitions.

Many opposition groups, like Machar’s SPLM-IO, rely primarily on armed conflict as a bargaining tool rather than engaging in constructive political processes.

Additionally, journalists and political activists face significant restrictions on their freedoms, often facing arrest or harassment, which hinders the opposition’s ability to play its watchdog role or freely express dissent.

– Opportunities for political maturity –

Despite these overwhelming challenges, there are still opportunities for the opposition in South Sudan to mature and develop. To achieve this, several steps must be taken:

1. Building Strong Party Institutions: The opposition needs to strengthen its organizational structure and unite around a common political vision.
2. Overcoming Tribal Loyalties: Opposition groups must move beyond narrow ethnic alliances and work toward building a unified national agenda.
3. Engaging in Peace Processes: Rather than relying on armed conflict, opposition groups should play an active role in peacebuilding efforts and political dialogues.
4. Focusing on Institutional Reforms: Instead of focusing solely on ousting the government, the opposition should offer practical solutions to reform the state’s institutions and promote good governance.

The opposition in South Sudan remains far from achieving the political maturity needed to lead the country toward a stable and democratic future.

While the challenges are significant, the opportunity still exists to develop an effective opposition, provided that it can overcome personal and tribal interests, embrace a national political vision, and actively contribute to peace, stability, and prosperity for all South Sudanese people.

EDITORIAL NOTE: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the writer. The accuracy of any claims made is the responsibility of the author and not of this website. If you would like to submit an opinion piece or analysis, please email us at eyeradio@eyeradio.org.

Mahmoud Akot Akok is a France-based South Sudanese pro-democracy activist and former spokesperson of the National Democratic Movement (NDM). He can be reached on mahmoudakot@gmail.com or +33602804330