9 the Third Phase of the Genocide in Equatoria 2015–17

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

9 the Third Phase of the Genocide in Equatoria 2015–17 9 THE THIRD PHASE OF THE GENOCIDE IN EQUATORIA 2015–17 The rippling effects of the second genocidal phase in Unity state contributed to launch the third phase in Central Equatoria. All three phases illustrated a trans- ference phenomenon from one phase to the next—not just in triggering vio- lence in the next location but also in repeating acts of genocidal violence (such as forced anthropophagy, genocidal gang-rapes, or killing checkpoints meant to sort out non-Dinka civilians, to name but a few). But while the second phase was largely subcontracted, the perpetrators of the third were overwhelming Dinka, as this chapter shows. This chapter explores the articulation of the Dinka supremacist ideology in this third genocidal phase and how it justified the perpetrators’ genocidal con- quest. Its components became especially evident when the government was not able to subcontract genocidal violence to local co-opted armed groups. This exclusionary ideology was not new. But Dinka perpetrators grew emboldened in the Equatoria region in 2015, before the start of the third genocidal phase in 2016. Until then, the Equatorians had mostly stayed out of this war. But they were not simple bystanders either. The Equatorians in the Beginning of the Third Civil War At the beginning of the conflict, some Equatorian civilians had welcomed the fleeing Nuer into their homes, and some Equatorian SPLA soldiers had tried to 187 188 CHAPTER 9 FIGURE 9.1. Bodies of civilians killed during the July 2016 battle of Juba lie wrapped in plastic bags for burial. Photo taken on July 16, 2016, on Yei Road, near Checkpoint Market, by Jason Patinkin. stand between their Dinka peers and Nuer civilians. “In Juba already in Decem- ber 2013, and Yei and Kajo Keji, already IO had sympathizers,” explained a Kakwa civil society member from Yei, “because the Equatorians saw killings and mas- sacres.”1 The Equatorians, although reluctant to get involved, felt much more sympathy for the Nuer than for the Dinka. They had grievances rooted in the past war’s Dinka protoconquest cemented after 2005. Besides, the Juba massacre and its resounding effect in other towns made it clear to other minority groups that killing non-Dinka civilians was deemed acceptable and even encouraged by the violent Dinka state. It was incredibly swift, which suggested planning for at least a military confrontation, and it set a precedent for the systematic state killing of non-Dinka people. Yet Equatorians understood the mounting tensions culminating into the third war to have been caused not so much by greed but rather by the ancient ethnic hatred and political competition between the Dinka and the Nuer. There were, in the beginning, very few Equatorians among the IO.2 Most of the Equatorians wanted to be left out of the violent competition with Kiir’s faction. “As time went on, we were looking at Dinka and Nuer as one and the same, and we were buying time and looking for an ally,” a Kakwa civil society member said.3 States’ borders (2011–2015) . Secondary towns .. State capitals 050 100200 300 Sudan Kilometers Abyei. UNITY UPPER NILE . Malakal ABYEI . Bentiu. NORTHERN . Guit. BAHR .Aweil EL GHAZAL. 2 Koch. .Kwajok . Leer. WARRAP Ethiopia .Wau . JONGLEI WESTERN BAHR EL GHAZAL LAKES ..Rumbek Bor WESTERN EQUATORIA .. CENTRAL Central African Republic EQUATORIA Mundri. EASTERN EQUATORIA Maridi . 3 . 1 Yambio .Juba .. Wonduruba. .Lobonok . Yei .Torit Kenya .Lanya Democratic Republic . Kajo Keji of the Congo .. Uganda FIGURE 9.2. Map of the three genocidal phases. 190 CHAPTER 9 The Equatorians, who had seen it all play out before with the 1991 split, were hoping to collect the crumbs of whatever would be left once the Dinka and Nuer had fought it out. In other words, this was not their war. Yet they also were victims of the state. The Equatorians were at the very bottom of the Dinka ethnic ranking because they were not considered a threat by the Dinka and as such they were not worth accommodating. The Equatorians would be drawn into the conflict, whether they wanted it or not. As soon as the conflict exploded in Juba in December 2013, the Dinka elite brought its cattle and cattle herders from Lakes to the south, into Western Equatoria. This created tensions and increased state violence against non-Dinka civilians perceived as potential dissenters.4 It only got worse with the repercus- sions of massive cattle looting in Unity state, when the SPLA and the Dinka elite’s cattle herders and their families brought the looted cattle into Western and then Central Equatoria. This marked the beginning of the expansion of the Dinka conquest into Equatoria. Aware of Equatorian sympathies for the Nuer and of increased frustra- tion with Dinka cattle herders, the SPLA leadership wanted to take no risk. So it rotated the Equatorian soldiers of SPLA Division 2 very quickly to the front lines of the Greater Upper Nile region in 2014 and accelerated this movement in September 2015—right when the situation was becoming untenable in Western Equatoria.5 A Pojulu trader lamented that the “Yei youth was taken to Unity state to be in the SPLA—75 percent of the youth in 2014. There was big fighting there and we don’t know if our boys are alive.”6 Ethnic ranking in the SPLA continued on the front lines, just as it had in the decades since 1983. This meant, in the words of an Equatorian SPLA soldier who defected from Upper Nile, that “the majority of Dinka have higher ranks and so they’re all relatives and they don’t send them to the front lines.”7 The wife of an Equatorian SPLA soldier explained that her husband and his ethnic comrades “complain about being in front of the other Dinka, so they die first. So there is a lot of loss of life in the greater Upper Nile region for Equatorians.”8 By rotating Equatorian soldiers, the SPLA leadership meant to prevent IO from gaining ground in the region. It also wanted to decapitate any serious armed rebellion trying to defend Equatorian land from the conquering SPLA troops and Dinka herders. The Equatorian soldier’s wife explained of her husband’s com- rades, “Most of them are located in the greater Upper Nile region because other- wise they will turn away from the SPLA if they’re located in Equatoria . There are very few desertions because the sites Bentiu and Malakal are very risky to escape, and it’s difficult to reach out to Equatoria.”9 “This was a policy,” believed the Pojulu man, “because we didn’t have youth to protect us.”10 THE THIRD PHASE OF THE GENOCIDE IN EQUATORIA 191 The rotation of these Equatorian SPLA soldiers into this region was likely intended to free up space for a third genocidal phase. Indeed, while the Equato- rian soldiers were assigned to the Greater Upper Nile region, fighting a war they did not consider was theirs against the Nuer, they were told that they would be next.11 Equatorian civilians who stayed in Yei were told the same thing.12 Sev- eral factors contributed to launch this third genocidal phase—most notably the July 2016 fighting in Juba between IO and the SPLA. But the bottom line is that the very conceptualization of this third genocidal phase was already there among Dinka SPLA troops in early 2014, to the extent that some low-level Dinka soldiers communicated it to other low-level Equatorian SPLA soldiers on the front lines.13 Western and Central Equatoria in 2015 Of course, in 2014, this third phase was still just an idea, and waging genocidal violence at the same time in both Unity and Equatoria was not a good idea, nor was it feasible—or necessary—yet. Yet in 2015, violence took on genocidal attri- butes in Western and Central Equatoria. It started in May 2015 in Mundri and in June in Maridi, when local inhabitants started joining local rebel groups (includ- ing the well-known local militia of the Arrow Boys, subcontracted by the SPLA to defend territory against LRA incursions in 2010) out of frustration with having their land trampled on by the SPLA and its cattle.14 The SPLA, a mix of Tiger, Commando, and Division 6, retaliated violently.15 “They already started burning houses in the morning (on June 8, 2015) and shooting any person non-Dinka,” explained civilians who fled.16 The perpetrators deployed the Dinka supremacist ideology they later used in Central Equatoria (explored more at length later). A civilian from Mundri, who protested having the Dinka herders’ cattle trample his land, related, “They said: ‘It’s us who fought with the Arabs to lead South Sudan’ . ‘Don’t talk, we’re the ones to be your leaders, not you. You’re not to lead us.’ ”17 The key elements of the perpetrators’ Dinka supremacist ideology were thus already articulated in 2015 in Western Equatoria. Dinka group legitimacy, strengthened in 2005–13, culminated in extreme group Dinka entitlement. This justified conquest through the denationalization of non-Dinka groups and the myth of a Dinka “master race”: “They say the Equatorians have no land, that we’re from Uganda. They say that the land of Equatoria is not mine—it’s theirs. They say South Sudan is for them, that I’m not South Sudanese.”18 At the time, the replacement and imprisonment of the popular Western Equa- toria state governor (Joseph Bakassoro) by Salva Kiir in July–August 2015 cre- ated further resentment, and accelerated recruitment into the local militia of the 192 CHAPTER 9 Arrow Boys in Western Equatoria, who declared allegiance to IO.19 Men from Western Equatoria were now caught in the same bind as their peers in Unity state: they either joined the opposition or faced government violence.
Recommended publications
  • Conflict and Crisis in South Sudan's Equatoria
    SPECIAL REPORT NO. 493 | APRIL 2021 UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org Conflict and Crisis in South Sudan’s Equatoria By Alan Boswell Contents Introduction ...................................3 Descent into War ..........................4 Key Actors and Interests ............ 9 Conclusion and Recommendations ...................... 16 Thomas Cirillo, leader of the Equatoria-based National Salvation Front militia, addresses the media in Rome on November 2, 2019. (Photo by Andrew Medichini/AP) Summary • In 2016, South Sudan’s war expand- Equatorians—a collection of diverse South Sudan’s transitional period. ed explosively into the country’s minority ethnic groups—are fighting • On a national level, conflict resolu- southern region, Equatoria, trig- for more autonomy, local or regional, tion should pursue shared sover- gering a major refugee crisis. Even and a remedy to what is perceived eignty among South Sudan’s con- after the 2018 peace deal, parts of as (primarily) Dinka hegemony. stituencies and regions, beyond Equatoria continue to be active hot • Equatorian elites lack the external power sharing among elites. To spots for national conflict. support to viably pursue their ob- resolve underlying grievances, the • The war in Equatoria does not fit jectives through violence. The gov- political process should be expand- neatly into the simplified narratives ernment in Juba, meanwhile, lacks ed to include consultations with of South Sudan’s war as a power the capacity and local legitimacy to local community leaders. The con- struggle for the center; nor will it be definitively stamp out the rebellion. stitutional reform process of South addressed by peacebuilding strate- Both sides should pursue a nego- Sudan’s current transitional period gies built off those precepts.
    [Show full text]
  • Water for Eastern Equatoria (W4EE)
    Water for Eastern Equatoria (W4EE) he first integrated water resource management (IWRM) project of its kind in South Sudan, Water Water for Eastern for Eastern Equatoria (W4EE) was launched in Components 2013 as part of the broader bilateral water Tprogramme funded through the Dutch Multiannual Equatoria (W4EE) Strategic Plan for South Sudan (2012–2015). W4EE focuses on three interrelated From the very beginning, W4EE was planned as a pilot components: IWRM programme in the Torit and Kapoeta States of The role of integrated water resource manage- Eastern Equatoria focusing on holistic management of the ment in fostering resilience, delivering economic Kenneti catchment, conflict-sensitive oversight of water Component 1: Integrated water resource management of the development, improving health, and promoting for productive use such as livestock and farming, and Kenneti catchment and surrounds peace in a long-term process. improved access to safe drinking water as well as sanitati- on and hygiene. The goal has always been to replicate key Component 2: Conflict-sensitive management of water for learnings and best practice in other parts of South Sudan. productive use contributes to increased, sustained productivity, value addition in agriculture, horticulture, and livestock The Kenneti catchment is very important to the Eastern Equatoria region for economic, social, and biodiversity reasons. The river has hydropower potential, supports the Component 3: Safely managed and climate-resilient drinking livelihoods of thousands of households, and the surroun- water services and improved sanitation and hygiene are available, ding area hosts a national park with forests and wetlands operated and maintained in a sustainable manner. as well as wild animals and migratory birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Return and Reintegration of Sudanese Refugees to Southern Sudan
    Return and Reintegration of Sudanese Refugees to Southern Sudan REVISED SUPPLEMENTARY APPEAL January 2004 – December 2005 Home beckons for these Sudanese refugees in Uganda. © UNHCR I. INTRODUCTION period up to 31 December 2004. The estimated funding requirements for planned activities during Decades of armed conflict in southern Sudan January – December 2005 are USD 60 million, have resulted in over 500,000 Sudanese fleeing thereby bringing the total two–year budget to USD into neighbouring countries of Uganda, Ethiopia, 89.9 million. UNHCR will reflect these revised Kenya, the Democratic Republic of the Congo project needs in the 2004 Inter-agency (DRC), Central African Republic (CAR) and Egypt. Consolidated Appeal for the Sudan Assistance The conflict also internally displaced about four Programme (ASAP). million persons. With the funds being requested, it will become In 2002, renewed peace talks launched in possible to strengthen UNHCR’s present capacity Machakos, Kenya, under the auspices of the to support the planned repatriation and Inter-Governmental Authority on Development reintegration activities in southern Sudan. In view (IGAD), resulted in the Machakos Protocol which of the total absence of basic infrastructure, such provided a framework for the cessation of as schools, hospitals and other public service hostilities between the Government of Sudan and facilities, UNHCR must work, more than ever, very the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army closely with all UN/other agencies with expertise (SPLM/A). This initiative created a momentum for in addressing the enormous needs of this complex both parties to engage in a sustainable peace and challenging operation. process. With the recent signing on 26 May 2004 between II.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Tenure Issues in Southern Sudan: Key Findings and Recommendations for Southern Sudan Land Policy
    LAND TENURE ISSUES IN SOUTHERN SUDAN: KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SOUTHERN SUDAN LAND POLICY DECEMBER 2010 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Tetra Tech ARD. LAND TENURE ISSUES IN SOUTHERN SUDAN: KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SOUTHERN SUDAN LAND POLICY THE RESULTS OF A RESEARCH COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE SUDAN PROPERTY RIGHTS PROGRAM AND THE NILE INSTITUTE OF STRATEGIC POLICY AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES DECEMBER 2010 DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. CONTENTS Acknowledgements Page i Scoping Paper Section A Sibrino Barnaba Forojalla and Kennedy Crispo Galla Jurisdiction of GOSS, State, County, and Customary Authorities over Land Section B Administration, Planning, and Allocation: Juba County, Central Equatoria State Lomoro Robert Bullen Land Tenure and Property Rights in Southern Sudan: A Case Study of Section C Informal Settlements in Juba Gabriella McMichael Customary Authority and Traditional Authority in Southern Sudan: A Case Study Section D of Juba County Wani Mathias Jumi Conflict Over Resources Among Rural Communities in Southern Sudan Section E Andrew Athiba Synthesis Paper Section F Sibrino Barnaba Forojalla and Kennedy Crispo Galla ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The USAID Sudan Property Rights Program has supported the Southern Sudan Land Commission in its efforts to undertake consultation and research on land tenure and property rights issues; the findings of these initiatives were used to draft a land policy that is meant to be both legitimate and relevant to the needs of Southern Sudanese citizens and legal rights-holders.
    [Show full text]
  • C the Impact of Conflict on the Livestock Sector in South Sudan
    C The Impact of Conflict on the Livestock Sector in South Sudan ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to express their gratitude to the following persons (from State Ministries of Livestock and Fishery Industries and FAO South Sudan Office) for collecting field data from the sample counties in nine of the ten States of South Sudan: Angelo Kom Agoth; Makuak Chol; Andrea Adup Algoc; Isaac Malak Mading; Tongu James Mark; Sebit Taroyalla Moris; Isaac Odiho; James Chatt Moa; Samuel Ajiing Uguak; Samuel Dook; Rogina Acwil; Raja Awad; Simon Mayar; Deu Lueth Ader; Mayok Dau Wal and John Memur. The authors also extend their special thanks to Erminio Sacco, Chief Technical Advisor and Dr Abdal Monium Osman, Senior Programme Officer, at FAO South Sudan for initiating this study and providing the necessary support during the preparatory and field deployment phases. DISCLAIMER FAO South Sudan mobilized a team of independent consultants to conduct this study. The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of FAO. COMPOSITION OF STUDY TEAM Yacob Aklilu Gebreyes (Team Leader) Gezu Bekele Lemma Luka Biong Deng Shaif Abdullahi i C The Impact of Conflict on the Livestock Sector in South Sudan TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...I ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... VI NOTES ..................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Western Equatoria State Map " Type Jonglei ") N State Capitals N " Western Bahr El Ghazal " 0 0 ' ' 0 0
    27°0'0"E 28°0'0"E 29°0'0"E 30°0'0"E " 31°0'0"E Tonj ") Unity Settlements Western Equatoria State Map " Type Jonglei ") N State Capitals N " Western Bahr el Ghazal " 0 0 ' ' 0 0 ° ") ° 7 Larger Towns 7 Warrap " Towns Lakes ") Big Villages Rumbek Ragao Small Villages Kporogedi Main Road Network Nadiangere Akot Yirol Ngukyu Alcool Kumio " ") Nagero County Boundaries Aliep Gutthom Delindia Hibbi State Boundaries Tebbe River Rohl Komangba Mapuordit Mapuordit National Boundary Ngoia Suo Mboyo Beir Rua Bungaru Korikori Madet Wilsary Laru Guamari Bilmogga Diungo Pulkum Du Nangume Kuloti Marar Modi Gweni Jokki Abbot International Boundaries TAMBURA Bor Dagai Eassi Dekada Moyat Luak River Kumu Dado Doku Maringa Kulu Bandala Whelbi Umbelti Minikolome Desere Uweli Awerial Nyendella Khogali Wara Bahr El Girin Marra Hills " Kussu Korai Kerjok Mvolo Assombo Mbakaia Kidi Gatanga Mamgumi Ndo " Ageng Tabau N Dogoba N " River Yubo Anganja " Nguku 0 0 ' Dibira Ambo Kila ' 0 Bittima Tolla 0 ° Duma Higola ° 6 Namutina Gira Domeri 6 M'bittima Wia Rigl Duma Mangi Dazaki Bufi Tali Lindi " Makangere Diaturu Lesi Awiri Lanioro Ali Bundit Ngogola Banwar Dakada Dari Renzi Nakape Kadi Yeri Biarubo Kirma " Teri Delinoi Mulinda Sassa Azai Kasiko Central Duboro Kulundulu Rigl Biki Madi Biti Bogori Andari African Koranza Koraja Gabir Tambura Duwwo Pagar Gulu Rushi Yeba Fort Hossinger Zangia Rika Liki Republic ") Abdulla Mbara Berri Lamindo Bukba Kpakpawiya Zabit Resi Onayo Amadi Kediba Bukita unknown Tagura Ire " Keza Wandi Mupoi Doso Wito Nambi Madoro Dali Bani Riku
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of Ethnic Groups in Southern Sudan Exact Representationw Ohf Iteh En Isleituation Ins Tehnen Acrountry
    Ethnic boundaries shown on this map are not an Distribution of Ethnic Groups in Southern Sudan exact representationW ohf iteh eN isleituation inS tehnen aCrountry. The administrative units and their names shown on this map do not imply White acceptance or recognition by the Government of Southern Sudan. Blue ") State Capitals This map aims only to support the work of the Humanitarian Community. Nile Renk Nile Sudan Renk Admin. Units County Level Southern Darfur Southern Shilluk Berta Admin. Units State Level Kordofan Manyo Berta Country Boundary Manyo Melut International Boundaries Shilluk Maban Sudan Fashoda Dinka (Abiliang) Abyei Pariang Upper Nile Burum Malakal Data Sources: National and State Dinka (Ruweng) ") boundaries based on Russian Sudan Malakal Baliet Abiemnhom Panyikang Map Series, 1:200k, 1970-ties. Rubkona Guit County Boundaries digitized based on Aweil North Statistical Yearbook 2009 Aweil East Twic Mayom ") Nuer (Jikany) Canal (Khor Fulus) Longochuk Southern Sudan Commission for Census, Dinka (Twic WS) Nuer (Bul) Statistics and Evaluation - SSCCSE. Fangak Dinka (Padeng) Digitized by IMU OCHA Southern Sudan Aweil West Dinka (Malual) Nuer (Lek) Gogrial East Unity Nuer (Jikany) Northern Bahr el Ghazal ") Luakpiny/Nasir Aweil Maiwut Aweil South Raga Koch Gogrial West Nuer (Jegai) Nyirol Ulang Nuer (Gawaar) Aweil Centre Warrap ") Tonj North Ayod Kwajok Mayendit Leer Dinka (Rek) Fertit Chad Nuer (Adok) Nuer (Lou) Jur Chol Tonj East ") Wau Akobo Western Bahr el Ghazal Nuer (Nyong) Dinka (Hol) Uror Duk Jur River Rumbek North Panyijar
    [Show full text]
  • Central Equatoria State Map
    " ") 30°0'0"E 31°0'0"E 32°0'0"E " Padak/baidit Central Equatoria State Map Lakes ") Anyidi Atiit " Attit Bor Jonglei Akojan Awerial Mimi " Mvolo Rein " Attir N N " " 0 0 ' ' 0 Bengeya 0 ° ° 6 Melekwich 6 Buron Tali Marlango " Jabor Bari Umbolo Tokot Verlingai Tellang Gillut Yebisak Jakari Buring Tombi Yeri Mirda Mandari Moggi Buka " Gboerr Shogle Tur Baro Gwojo-adung Gaya Mogutt Bori Mejiki Kulwo Rumih Nyale Gutetian Jarrah Maralinn Makur Tiarki Gigging Vora Malari Maleit Bita Badai Gemmaiza Parilli TERKEKA Bojo-ajut Tindalo Mori Jua Baringa Tuga Gobo Wani Poko Bologna Bokuna Pagar Settlements Loriangwara Tankariat Tukara Mandari Pom Toe Kursomba Gali Type Langni Rejar Amadi Lopore Wala Langkokai Bulu Koli " Loduk Golo ") State Capitals Kumaring Rego Terkeka Logono ") Wit ") Wanyang Larger Towns Western Equatoria Minga Gabir Magara Juban Western Equatoria Rambo Jelli Amardi " Biyara Kworijik Towns ") Mundri Lui Badigeru Swamp " Legeri Simsima Big Villages Bala Pool Small Villages Mangalla Buko " Fajelu Tijor Gabur Main Road Network Rokon Rombe Lako " Man Karo Jokoki Lado Koda County Boundaries Wulikare Nija Ludo Kenyi Logo Luala Lado N N " El Iqlim Al Istiwa'i Tibari " 0 State Boundaries 0 ' ' 0 0 ° ° 5 Gori 5 Ilibari River Nyigera Gamichi National Boundary Mugiri Nyara Indura Pitia Gondokoro Gworolorongo Roja Kenyi Tambur International Boundaries Nyangwara Lukudu Juba River Wanga Singi Perang Mogiri Jongwa Lokoko ") Chamba Chaka Gumba Mandubulu Kamarok Lokoiya Mendopolo Kimangoro Tokiman Tobaipapwa Katatabi Lekilla Jeraputa Lokuta Rejaf
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Practices on Burial and Care for the Sick in South Sudan
    Helpdesk Report Cultural practices on burial and care for the sick in South Sudan Iffat Idris GSDRC, University of Birmingham 17 September 2018 Question Carry out a rapid literature review on cultural practices in South Sudan on burial and caring for the sick, focusing on differences in practices across different ethnic groups. The main linguistic groupings and ethnic groups in each that are predominant in areas considered to be at highest risk of Ebola outbreak in South Sudan are: Bantu-speaking – Zande and Baka Bare-speaking – Moru, Kakwa, Pojulu, Kuku and Bare Others – Acholi, Madi, Lotuko, Toposa and Didinga Contents 1. Summary 2. Burial practices by ethnic group 3. Other relevant findings 4. References The K4D helpdesk service provides brief summaries of current research, evidence, and lessons learned. Helpdesk reports are not rigorous or systematic reviews; they are intended to provide an introduction to the most important evidence related to a research question. They draw on a rapid desk-based review of published literature and consultation with subject specialists. Helpdesk reports are commissioned by the UK Department for International Development and other Government departments, but the views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of DFID, the UK Government, K4D or any other contributing organisation. For further information, please contact [email protected]. 1. Summary Literature on cultural practices for burial and care for the sick among individual ethnic groups in South Sudan was very limited. However, it clearly points to the importance of proper burials among all ethnic groups: these typically entail washing the body of the deceased; it can take several days before burial takes place; and graves are often located within or close to family homesteads.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Equatoria State
    Central Equatoria State Map 30°0'0"E 31°0'0"E 32°0'0"E Ngwer Falabai Ngop Fagiel Korikori Wulu Paker Gumro Unagok Alel Lual Ashandit Kulu Chundit Bunagok Bor Makuac Eassi Dekada Yirol West Atiit Deng Shol Pengko Jerweng )" Brong Anyidi Wulu Pul Anyuol Anuol Rokon Macdit Minikolome Malangya Khalil Nyadask Awerial Wurrier Tukls Lake Nyiropo Latolot Kondoagoi Anyat Awan Wako Lakes " Nyiel Bahr El Girin Awerial Bor South Mvolo Pwora Dor Jonglei " Minkamman Jalango Guar Aliab Aliab N Dogoba Kila Malek N " " 0 Dorri 0 ' Ambo Wun Abiyei ' 0 Bengeya Golo Dijeyr Pariak Pariak 0 ° Wun Thou ° 6 River Tapari 6 Gira Domeri Melekwich Wun Chwei Mangi Panabang Mvolo Koalikiri Tali Melwel Latuk Lesi " Jabor Bari Dakada Awiri Wasi Verlingai Tellang Banwar Dari Ndia Azai Jakari Mirda Tombi Duboro Yeri Delinoi Mulinda Mandari Teri Tur Gwojo-Adung Azai Kulundulu Kasiko Gaya Gutetian Tiarki Bori Kulwo Jarrah Maralinn Bogora Gigging Bogori Vora Bita Gemmaiza Lakamadi Tindalo Bojo-Ajut Terekeka Gobo Gabir Bokuna Poko Gulu Rushi Duwwo Wani Mika Pagar Bitti Tukara Abdulla Mbara Magiri Lamindo Pom Lopore Wala Gali Kpakpawiya Kederu Kediba Onayo Amadi Bulu Koli Ire " Paya Wandi Riku Doso Wito Rego Logono Terekeka Kemande Mariba Gabir Wit Magara )" Movo Minga Juban Western Equatoria Gullu Mundri Amardi Rambo Lui Gabat Badigeru Swamp )" " Wiro River Meri Mundri East Kotobi Lanyi Bala Pool Lapon Yalo Mangalla Mundri West Buko " Madi Buaji Naramoa Karika Landigwa Laporu Rokon Tijor Gunba " Mulai Kalala Bunduqiyah Bahr Olo Nidri Wulikare Bundukki Jambo Jalang Luala N
    [Show full text]
  • SOUTH SUDAN SITUATION REPORT 31 August 2018
    UNICEF SOUTH SUDAN SITUATION REPORT 31 August 2018 South Sudan Humanitarian Situation Report 01 – 31 AUGUST 2018: SOUTH SUDAN SITREP #124 SITUATION IN NUMBERS Highlights 1.91 million • Since the signing of the peace agreement between the government and the Internally displaced persons (IDPs) opposition groups on 5 August in Khartoum, incidents of armed conflict have (OCHA South Sudan Humanitarian Snapshot, reduced significantly. However, the Ceasefire and Transitional Security 7 September 2018) Arrangements Monitoring Mechanism (CTSAMM) has accused government and SPLA-iO pro-Machar forces of violating the Permanent Ceasefire, following 2.47 million reported clashes in Unity and Bringi on 19 and 21 August, respectively. South Sudanese refugees in • Despite ongoing conflict in areas of Greater Upper Nile, Greater Equatoria and neighbouring countries (OCHA South Sudan Humanitarian Snapshot, Western Bahr el Ghazal, UNICEF was able to reopen and resume services at 10 7 September 2018) outpatient therapeutic programme (OTP) sites, including in Koch (4), Leer (2), Mayendit (2) and Rubkona (2). • World Breastfeeding Week was celebrated on 1-7 August, under the theme 7.1 million South Sudanese who are severely “Breastfeeding, Foundation of Life.” C4D implementing partners across the food insecure country supported the commemoration with activities such as radio messaging, (May-July 2018 Projection, Integrated Food public address systems and traditional dances to raise awareness on the Security Phase Classification) importance of breastfeeding
    [Show full text]
  • Central Equatoria State! Map ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 30°E ! 31°E ! ! 32°E
    ! (as of Dec! 2016) ! Central Equatoria State! Map ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 30°E ! 31°E ! ! 32°E ! ! !Ngwer ! Korikori Ngop Fagiel Wulu Paker ! Gumro ! Lual ! ! Unagok Alel ! ! ! Ashandit Kulu Chundit ! ! ! Makuac Bor ! Atiit Bunagok Yirol West ! ! ! Deng Shol Pengko ! Eassi Dekada Jerweng ! ! ! ! Bro! ng Anyidi Wulu Pul Anyuol ! Anuol !! ! Macdit !Rokon ! Minikolome Kwal Tiu ! Malangya ! Khalil ! ! Wurrie!r ! Latolot Aw! erial !Tukls Kondoagoi Lake Nyiropo " ! Wako ! Lakes Anyat ! Awan ! ! ! Nyiel ! ! ! Bahr El Girin Awerial ! Bor South ! Pwora Mvolo ! Dor Jonglei " ! Minkamman Jalango Aliab ! ! Guar ! Aliab Dogoba Kila ! ! ! ! ! Malek N ! Dorri N ° Wun Abiyei ° Ambo ! Pariak 6 ! 6 Bengeya ! Golo ! ! ! Dijeyr ! Pariak ! Wun Thou! Gira Melekwich ! ! Domeri ! Wun Chwei ! Panabang Mangi ! ! Jabor ! Koalikiri Tal!i ! Mvolo ! " Melwel Latuk Lesi ! ! Bari Dakada ! ! ! Awiri Verlingai ! Wasi ! ! Tellang Banwar Dari ! ! Jakari Tombi Ndia Azai ! Mirda ! ! Mulinda ! Duboro Yeri Delinoi ! Mandari ! ! ! ! ! Teri Tur ! Gwojo-Adung Azai Kasiko ! ! Kulundulu ! Gaya ! Tiarki ! ! ! !Bori Mejiki G!utetian ! ! Kulwo ! ! Maralinn Jarrah Bogora Gigging Bogori ! Vora ! ! ! ! Bita Muni Gemmaiza ! " ! !Lakamadi Tindalo Terekeka ! Gobo Poko Gabir ! Bokuna ! ! Duwwo Wani Mika! Gulu Rushi ! ! Pagar ! Tukara ! ! Bitti ! Abdulla !Mbara ! ! Lamindo Pom ! Magiri ! Gali Kederu Lopore Wala ! Kpakpawiya ! Kediba ! Onayo ! Amad! i ! Bulu Koli ! Ire " ! ! ! Wandi Wito Riku Doso ! ! ! Rego ! ! Logono Terekeka ! Kemande Wit " ! Mariba ! ! ! Gabir Ma!gara ! Movo ! ! Minga
    [Show full text]