Opinion| South Sudan in wrong hands: A defense university for a state that has yet to defend its people

There is something profoundly tragic, almost comical, about a government racing to establish a defense university while the country it claims to defend is struggling to secure peace, feed its citizens, pay its soldiers, and make its existing public institutions function. In South Sudan, the government appears determined to build the roof before laying the foundation, then ask the international community to finance the construction.

President Salva Kiir Mayardit’s directive to establish a specialised university for defence, security and strategic studies raises a fundamental question: what exactly is the government defending when the state itself remains institutionally fragile, the peace process is faltering, and millions of citizens are trapped in insecurity and humanitarian distress?

I do not oppose a defence university in principle. Every sovereign country has a legitimate interest in professional military education, strategic research and national security. My objection is to the grotesque contradiction between the government’s grand announcements and its failure to fulfil more urgent national responsibilities. A university cannot substitute for a functioning defence force, and an impressive institutional name cannot conceal the absence of effective governance.

Juba University, the University of Bahr el Ghazal and other public universities need resources to strengthen their operations. Public infrastructure projects remain unfinished, while questions persist about the condition of Akon International Airport and the prolonged construction of the State House. Soldiers and other organised forces, including civil servants at all levels, need reliable salaries and professional support. Electoral institutions require funding, hospitals need medicines, and citizens need food, security and peace. Yet the government is already directing financial resources towards a new institution whose projected establishment costs, operational requirements, and opening date have not been publicly specified.

Is this nation governed through a coherent development plan, or through a succession of political announcements designed to manufacture the appearance of progress?

In political science, this contradiction resembles what scholars describe as a capability trap: a government adopts the outward appearance of institutional development without building the practical capacity required to deliver public services. It can also resemble blame avoidance, policy diversion and bureaucratic foot-dragging when new initiatives distract attention from unresolved obligations. These concepts do not, by themselves, prove that the President or his government is deliberately misleading the public. Nevertheless, they provide a compelling framework for scrutinising a leadership that repeatedly announces new ambitions while fundamental state responsibilities remain unmet.

The deeper concern is political. The SPLM-IG leadership appears increasingly preoccupied with retaining power within a fragmented governing coalition whose constituent interests do not necessarily converge on a common national vision. If political survival takes precedence over peace, institutional accountability and national reconstruction, South Sudan will remain trapped in a cycle of crisis management without genuine recovery. A government may preserve its grip on the presidency while losing the country it was elected to govern.

The international community must therefore stop confusing presidential directives with national progress. International partners should demand transparent budgets, measurable institutional outcomes, independent audits, credible implementation of the Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS), and clear evidence that public expenditure serves the national interest. Targeted accountability measures against individuals credibly implicated in corruption or serious abuses should be considered where legally justified, while humanitarian assistance must continue to reach vulnerable civilians without political obstruction.

South Sudan does not need donors to finance another grand announcement while existing obligations remain neglected. It needs partners willing to distinguish genuine state-building from the performance of state-building.

My position is simple: peace is South Sudan’s most urgent national project; security is meaningless without the protection of citizens; and education is an investment only when it strengthens, rather than distracts from, the institutions a country already needs.

A defence university may eventually become a valuable national asset. But if the government can mobilise political attention for a new university while failing to resolve the crises confronting existing institutions, the public is entitled to question its priorities.

The greatest danger is not that South Sudan lacks plans, committees, directives or ambitious projects. It is that the country may be governed by a political establishment that mistakes the survival of its leadership for the survival of the state.

A nation cannot recover merely because its President continues to issue orders. Nor can its future be secured by educating officers in strategic studies while neglecting the political settlement, institutional discipline and public accountability that make national defence meaningful.

If the international community is serious about South Sudan, it must invest in the survival of the state and the welfare of its people, not simply in the political survival of those who occupy its highest offices. South Sudan must not be allowed to become a country where the government keeps building new promises while the foundations of the nation continue to crumble.

The writer is a South Sudanese constitutional lawyer, academic, and political figure. He studied law at Makerere University in Kampala, Uganda. He is an independent legal researcher and constitutional expert and serves as a lecturer and Deputy Dean of the College of Law at Starford International University in Juba. He is also a member of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-in-Opposition (SPLM-IO).

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.

The post Opinion| South Sudan in wrong hands: A defense university for a state that has yet to defend its people appeared first on Radio Tamazuj.