Opinion| Who destroyed South Sudan?

Introduction

Fifteen years after independence, South Sudan stands at a critical crossroads. The outbreak of conflict on December 15, 2013 exposed deep political divisions within the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) and marked the beginning of one of the darkest chapters in the country’s history. During the liberation struggle, South Sudanese were united by a common aspiration: to build a nation founded on freedom, justice, human rights, the rule of law, and people-centered development.

According to South Sudan’s former Information Minister Barnaba Marial Benjamin, more than half of the stolen funds were taken during the “durra” scandal, when a large government purchase of sorghum, the country’s staple food, was never distributed.

When independence was achieved on July 9, 2011, many citizens believed that decades of suffering had finally given birth to a nation that would guarantee peace, dignity, and equal opportunities for all. However, the promise of independence gradually gave way to political rivalries, corruption, ethnic polarization, and persistent instability. Instead of strengthening national unity, many political leaders increasingly prioritized personal, ethnic, and political interests above the collective aspirations of the people.

What was once celebrated as the dawn of freedom and self-determination has become a painful story of conflict, economic hardship, corruption, and unfulfilled promises. Millions of South Sudanese who sacrificed for liberation envisioned a country built on justice, prosperity, and unity. Yet far too many citizens continue to endure poverty, insecurity, displacement, and uncertainty about the future.

As we reflect on our national journey, we must confront a difficult but necessary question:

Who destroyed South Sudan?

This question is uncomfortable because it compels us to examine not only the failures of leaders but also the broader systems and decisions that have contributed to the country’s challenges. While many seek to identify a single individual or group responsible for South Sudan’s difficulties, the reality is far more complex. South Sudan’s decline has been shaped by poor leadership, corruption, weak institutions, political intolerance, ethnic manipulation, and the collective failure to safeguard the principles upon which the nation was founded.[1]

The country was not destroyed overnight. Rather, it has been weakened gradually through years of missed opportunities, poor governance, and the abandonment of national values that once inspired generations to struggle for freedom.

The failure of political leadership

The greatest betrayal of South Sudan has come from failures in political leadership. Independence presented a historic opportunity to build a democratic, inclusive, and prosperous nation. Instead of focusing on nation-building and institutional development, many leaders prioritized political survival, personal enrichment, and the consolidation of power.

Public institutions were weakened by political interference, while public resources were too often treated as private property. Political competition became a struggle for control rather than a contest of ideas, policies, and visions for national development. National interests were frequently sacrificed in pursuit of individual and factional ambitions.

The consequences have been devastating. The political crisis that erupted in December 2013 plunged the country into widespread violence. Thousands of people lost their lives, millions were displaced, and countless families continue to live with the trauma of conflict. The violence not only destroyed lives and livelihoods but also shattered public trust in leadership and government institutions.

Despite several peace agreements, implementation has often been slow and inconsistent. As a result, many South Sudanese continue to question whether the country’s leaders have genuinely learned from the mistakes of the past and whether they are fully committed to lasting peace and national reconciliation.

The political manipulation of ethnicity

South Sudan’s diversity should have been one of its greatest strengths. The country’s many ethnic communities possess rich cultures, traditions, and histories that could have formed the foundation of a strong and inclusive national identity.

Instead, ethnic differences have too often been manipulated for political purposes. Certain political actors have exploited ethnic identities to mobilize support, spread fear, and maintain influence. This has deepened divisions and fostered mistrust among communities that once coexisted peacefully.

Let us be honest: tribes did not destroy South Sudan. Rather, politicians and power brokers who weaponized ethnic identities for political gain contributed significantly to the country’s divisions. Ethnicity itself is not the problem. The problem arises when ethnicity is used as a tool for exclusion, domination, and political competition.

No nation can prosper when citizens are encouraged to view one another as rivals rather than development partners. Sustainable peace requires a shared national identity that transcends ethnic affiliations and promotes mutual respect, equality, and inclusion.

Corruption and mismanagement of public resources

Corruption has been one of the most destructive forces undermining South Sudan’s development. Despite possessing significant natural resources, particularly oil, the country continues to face serious levels of poverty, unemployment, and inadequate public services.

Many citizens continue to ask a simple but important question: where have the nation’s resources gone?

For years, allegations of corruption and financial mismanagement have dominated public discourse. Resources that should have funded schools, hospitals, roads, and essential public services have often failed to translate into tangible improvements in the lives of ordinary citizens.

Corruption is more than an economic crime. It is a direct assault on human dignity and social justice. Every public dollar that is stolen or mismanaged represents a child denied an education, a patient denied healthcare, a community denied development, and a young person denied opportunity.

The failure to address corruption effectively has weakened public confidence in government institutions and undermined trust between citizens and the state.

The militarization of politics

Another major factor contributing to South Sudan’s challenges has been the militarization of politics. For decades, violence has often been rewarded while peaceful dialogue and democratic engagement have struggled to gain equal prominence.

Too many political actors have viewed armed conflict as a pathway to influence, recognition, and power. This dangerous culture has normalized violence as a means of resolving political disputes.

No nation can achieve sustainable peace when disagreements are settled through armed confrontation rather than dialogue, negotiation, and constitutional processes. The future of South Sudan cannot be built through violence. It must be built upon democratic values, respect for human rights, accountability, and the rule of law.

Political leaders must recognize that lasting stability comes from inclusive governance, not military dominance. Citizens deserve a political system where ideas compete peacefully and where conflicts are resolved through institutions rather than weapons.

Weak institutions and the crisis of governance

Strong nations are built upon strong institutions. Independent courts, professional civil services, transparent oversight bodies, accountable security sectors, and effective local governments are essential for sustainable development and social stability.

Unfortunately, many institutions in South Sudan remain vulnerable to political interference, inadequate resources, and limited capacity. Weak institutions create opportunities for corruption, selective justice, and abuse of power.

When institutions fail to function independently and effectively, citizens lose confidence in government. Trust erodes, public participation declines, and impunity becomes entrenched.

Building a stronger South Sudan requires strengthening institutions that serve the public interest rather than partisan or personal interests. Good governance cannot depend solely on individual leaders; it must be rooted in durable and accountable institutions.

The role of external actors

The international community and regional actors have played important roles in supporting humanitarian assistance, peace negotiations, and development initiatives in South Sudan. Their contributions have helped save lives and sustain peace efforts during difficult periods.

However, external actors must also reflect on the effectiveness of their engagement. At times, international efforts have focused more on crisis management than on addressing the structural causes of conflict and instability.

Peace agreements alone cannot build a nation. Sustainable peace requires long-term investment in governance, institution-building, reconciliation, education, economic development, and civic participation.

South Sudan’s future must ultimately be shaped and owned by South Sudanese citizens themselves. International partners can provide support, but they cannot substitute for national leadership, accountability, and collective responsibility.

Citizens must also reflect

While political leaders bear primary responsibility for governing the country, citizens also have a role to play in shaping the nation’s future. Democracy cannot flourish when people remain silent in the face of corruption, injustice, and division.

Citizens have a responsibility to reject tribalism, promote peaceful coexistence, and hold leaders accountable for their actions. Civil society organizations, faith leaders, women, youth, academics, and community leaders all have important roles in fostering a culture of accountability and national unity.

Change becomes possible when citizens actively participate in shaping public policy and defending democratic values.

A new path forward

This article is not merely about assigning blame. It is about promoting accountability and inspiring change.

The future of South Sudan depends on whether its leaders are willing to place national interests above personal ambitions. It depends on whether institutions are strengthened to uphold justice and accountability. It depends on whether citizens reject division and embrace unity. It depends on whether women and young people are empowered to participate meaningfully in decision-making processes.

Most importantly, it depends on whether the country embraces a new culture of accountability, transparency, and national service.

South Sudan’s greatest resource is not oil or any other natural wealth.

Its greatest resource is its people.

The resilience of South Sudanese citizens is extraordinary. Despite years of conflict, displacement, economic hardship, and uncertainty, communities continue to demonstrate courage, determination, and hope. The same spirit that delivered independence can also rebuild the nation.

But rebuilding requires honesty. We cannot solve problems that we refuse to acknowledge.

Therefore, instead of asking only who destroyed South Sudan, we must begin asking who is willing to save it.

Will leaders choose service over self-interest?

Will citizens reject division and embrace national unity?

Will institutions protect the public interest rather than partisan interests?

Will future generations inherit a country that is at peace with itself?

These are the questions that matter most.

Conclusion

South Sudan was not destroyed by one person, one tribe, or one event. Rather, it has been weakened by years of poor governance, corruption, political violence, ethnic manipulation, weak institutions, and missed opportunities for reform. Acknowledging these realities is not an act of pessimism. It is an act of patriotism.

True patriotism requires the courage to confront difficult truths and the determination to build a better future.

The story of South Sudan is still being written. The final chapter has not yet been decided. The responsibility before us is clear: we can continue down the path of division and decline, or we can choose accountability, reconciliation, justice, and national renewal.

History will ultimately judge us not by who destroyed South Sudan, but by who stood up to rebuild it.

The writer is a South Sudanese gender scholar, human rights defender, and public policy advocate. He can be reached via termanyang24@gmail.com**.

The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by Radio Tamazuj are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made is the responsibility of the author, not Radio Tamazuj.

---

[1] Government Officials Steal $4 Billion from South Sudan – Impunity Watch – Syracuse University

The post Opinion| Who destroyed South Sudan? appeared first on Radio Tamazuj.