UN, AU welcome Bashir-Kiir meeting in Juba
April 13, 2013 (JUBA) – Friday’s meeting between South Sudan president, Salva Kiir and his Sudan counterpart, Omer Ahmed Al-Bashir has widely been viewed as gesture of improve relations between the two ex foes. The two
April 13, 2013 (JUBA) – Friday’s meeting between South Sudan president, Salva Kiir and his Sudan counterpart, Omer Ahmed Al-Bashir has widely been viewed as gesture of improve relations between the two ex foes.
The two leaders, at a press conference held in Juba after their meeting, said they both agreed to form a joint high level committee to work out modalities seeking to resolve the remaining outstanding issues between them.
Bashir, making a first time visit to the South Sudan capital since it got its independence in July 2011, said he ordered for resumption of Sudan’s border with its southern neighbour and pledged stronger ties with the latter.
Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary-General, in a statement, said he was encouraged by the constructive discussion between the two leaders on the implementation of the agreements they signed in Addis Ababa on 27 September 2012.
He however, urged both Kiir and his Sudanese counterpart to “maintain this positive momentum.”
The South Sudanese president and his visiting Sudan counterpart ended their talks on Friday without striking a deal on the issue of the contested Abyei region.
Bashir, however, vowed to work hand to hand with Kiir to resolve the outstanding issues including Abyei where they are yet to establish temporary institutions and set up a referendum commission.
“The Secretary-General commends both Presidents for their decision to continue their efforts to resolve the Abyei issue in accordance with the implementation matrix,” the statement reads in part, further urged the two leaders to resolve their differences regarding the final settlement of the disputed region.
In a related development, Chairperson of the African Union, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, congratulated both Bashir and Kiir for their fruitful summit meeting in Juba.
The meeting, she stressed, was a further “demonstration of their commitment to foster the normalization of relations between the two countries and promote the wellbeing of their peoples.
Zuma, in a statement, particularly commended the two Presidents for upholding the letter and spirit of the Cooperation Agreement of 27 September 2012, and for reiterating their commitment towards the full implementation of all its nine components.
“In this respect, she notes with satisfaction their decision to direct all joint mechanisms and committees to accelerate their efforts, in order to enhance the relations between the two countries in all fields of cooperation,” the statement says.
She however welcomed the commitment of the two presidents to resolve the issue of Abyei, in accordance with the Implementation Matrix, as well as their decision to establish a High Ministerial Joint Committee to be chaired by the two vice Presidents of both countries, in order to facilitate speedy decision-making regarding the enhancement of relations between the two countries.
The AU, she stressed, will continue to support the two countries in the implementation of the agreements they have signed and towards the achievement of the overall objective of two viable States mutually supportive and at peace with one another.
The two leaders, according to South Sudan Information minister, agreed to set up a joint administration in Abyei, but failed to agree on how the local legislative council should be composed.
“President Salva stressed on the need to respect previous arrangement. He wants the 60% representation and 40% representation for the government of Sudan. This was how it used to be but president Bashir said it is better to use 50-50 representation”, Barnaba Marial said
He further said the two presidents convened to continue their discussions on the issue and pointed out that Bashir had asked Kiir to visit Khartoum for further engagement on issues which remained unresolved.
“They will continue dialogue. You know nothing gets finished at once. There are issues which need consultations and explanation for better understanding”, the minister said.
Khartoum says it had previously accepted the 40% share because it wanted to encourage Southerners to vote for unity. But now as things are different it wants to re-establish the share of 50% as it is provided in 2005 peace agreement
(ST)
Zerai April 14, 2013
Albashr is accountable for our people is sales to Rashaid and Bedioum, because Sudan collaborated with them and did not stop them, so he is Eritrean blood sake.
Senayit April 18, 2013
Zerai, Don’t fool your self. It’s the crazy mad dog Isayas is accountable for our people is sales to Rashaid and Bedioum.
Kombishtato April 14, 2013
Taken from YG’s “(II) Discontent at the Top: How Indispensable Is the Prison System to the Eritrean Defense Forces?”
http://asmarino.com/articles/1694-ii-discontent-at-the-top-how-indispensable-is-the-prison-system-to-the-eritrean-defense-forces5
The loss of control over one’s own life
What is it about a prison that is to be dreaded most?
Responding to this question will provide us with a hint why Eritrea has been called the largest open-air prison in the world. It will do it in a way that bypasses the categorical details of the circles mentioned above; that is, by providing us with an overarching definition that overrides the differences in the details in each circle. Given this definition, it is not only the army conscript but also the civilian that we would find entrapped in the prison system of the nation.
Even though one prison system differs from another depending on the type of government that enforces it, there is one defining characteristic that all prisons share: it is a place where the individual loses total control over his/her life. Once rendered a prisoner, one gives up the liberty to take control of his life, as the government takes over that responsibility. Within the walled prison, every aspect of the prisoner’s daily life is planned and rigorously enforced by the prison authorities. The prisoner will have no say at all in planning and organizing his life in prison. And if we have carefully followed the four circles mentioned above both in regard to the conscript and ghebar (civilian), the most defining characteristic in their lives happens to be similar to that of the classical prisoner in this overarching sense. As the totalitarian state tries to control every aspect of the individual’s life – parental, educational, occupational, religious, social, etc – in the confined world it consigns him/her, the individual loses control over important aspects of his life. What makes this worse in the Eritrean case is that the nation happens to inhabit the worst of two worlds – that of totalitarianism and anarchy, seemingly contradictory worlds – because it has never been able to come out of the formative stage of totalitarianism, where everything remains in a state of flux [more on this in Part IV].
The loss of control that the individual faces in the disjointed world of today’s Eritrea is pervasive: to mention just a few: parents (in civilian Eritrea) who have lost control over their children, with Shaebia taking over their upbringing since their teenage years; fathers in the indefinite national service having no control over the upbringing of their children, as they grow up in their absence; women folk facing a grim future, with very slim prospective of marriage; students with no prospects to pursue their education, no jobs to look forward to, no married life to envision, etc; religious people who lost control over their spiritual life, denied as they are to freely practice their religion; kahnat losing control over their churches, as the regime forces them to carry arms; businessmen who cannot plan ahead, given the unpredictable nature of the regime; farmers who have lost control over their farms and food products, given the predatory nature of the regime; and, above all, a whole generation stranded in the middle of nowhere – both geographically and metaphorically.
The regime follows a simple strategy in its attempt at totalitarian control: as it introduces anarchy into the life of the individual so that it would be difficult for him/her to plan and organize his/her life, the regime’s control over his/her life increases by that much. The massive dislocation that it conducts on these population groups is meant to bring such anarchy in the individual’s life. Thus, the higher the anarchy level (and the unpredictability that comes with it), the more secure gets the totalitarian grip over the masses. That is to say, the more abnormal the lives of the masses get as result of the dislocation, the more secure the regime gets in its power hegemony. It is failing to understand how this overarching mechanism of the totalitarian system of the Eritrean kind works that has left the opposition tinkering with superfluous demands. Anyone who grasps the extent of the total loss of control over one’s life that currently characterizes the typical life in Eritrea would never spend regurgitating democratic demands that would make sense only if no such anarchy at every level exists.
Think of a mother that has lost control of everything that she holds dear; foremost, her children – does that sound familiar? Let say, she has had six children, not unusual for an Eritrean family. One was killed in ghedli, another one in the border war. Two have been serving the national service for years. Recently though she has heard that her son who has converted into Pente (Evangelical Christian), as many of his generation happen to do, has been apprehended by the authorities after having found him reading the bible. Ever since, she hasn’t had any information about his whereabouts or condition. And when it comes to her beautiful daughter, even as she keeps reassuring her mom that everything is OK with her in the national service, the mother has been heart broken ever since she heard rumors that she has been forced to live with a colonel in sexual servitude. Her other two children have left the nation for good, as hundreds of thousands of their generation have done. One still remains stranded in a refugee camp in Ethiopia, hopelessly waiting for a ticket to the West. His more daring sister, after going through a harrowing experience, is now in Israel. When the Arab Bedouins had held the daughter hostage, the family was forced to sell their house to get her free. Again, even as this daughter too keeps reassuring the family she is doing fine in Israel, the mother has heard from others that all is not well – that her daughter arrived in Israel with late pregnancy, and gave birth to a child from her Arab rapist. To cup it all, with the forming of the new militia, her old man has now been forced to carry arms.
Now, who would dare tell us that prioritizing the release of political prisoners or the implementation of the constitution would reflect this mother’s tragic state best? Rather, at the root of the mother’s problem is a disjointed Eritrea that has rendered all her beloved children inaccessible, and thereby left her totally helpless. First, the disjointed world of ghedli swallowed up her eldest son. After all, the idea of disjointed Eritrea comes from ghedli, where an insulated world distinct from ghebar Eritrea had been created; one that found it difficult to meld into the civilian world even after independence. Second, the ghedli-replicated national service devoured another son, put another one in prison and turned the third into a sex slave. And, third, ever since their escape, the remaining two have remained trapped in Prison Eritrea’s trajectory in the region. All these disjointed parts being out of her reach, all the mother could do throughout the unfolding of this family tragedy is watch helplessly from afar as the Shaebia monster keeps gobbling up her children one after the other. She remains a prisoner amidst the abnormal world that the ghedli generation has created. Now, who among us would dare say that her predicament is less than any other actual prisoner? After all, the loss of control in her case is as total as anyone confined within the four walls of prison. Furthermore, unlike the case of the political prisoners which remains confined to thousands, her case is a typical story told again and again by families all over Eritrea.
daniel April 14, 2013
IS BASHIR FOR REAL? IS HE REALY CHANGING?
wedi aman April 14, 2013
OMER AHMED ALBESHIR AND PRESIDENT SALVAKIIR THEY IMPROVE RELATION BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRY AND THAT IS PPL LIKE PICE IS THE BIG WORD ISSAIS AFEWERKI WAS THE PROBLEM TAKE LONG TIME BETWEEN THOS TWO CONTRY. IF ISSAIS AFEWERKI IS GON THE HORN OF AFRICA WILL BE PICE FOR AVER PICE IS ABIG WORD…..BOTH ARE GOOD LEADER. AND I HOPE ERITREA ALSO WILL HAVE DEMOCRATIC STATE VERY SOONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.
Eritrawi April 15, 2013
Congratulations, both Presidents. This is politically defeat, shame, and failure to the lonely lame duck Asmara gang leader.
Goodnews April 15, 2013
When will be eritrea and ethiopia visit each other and work for mutual benefits? can it happen?
ahmed saleh April 15, 2013
We wish them well to reach on lasting peace between the South and North . At the same
time we wish for Somalia too to settle their differences to bring peace in the country .
To have stable region benefit the neighboring countries to progress people’s social
and economical standards . The sad part is , Eritrea under the current leadership might
fall on position of more isolation from its neighbors because of Issayas false show on
political affairs either at national or foreign policy . A person who possess rigidity ,
evil-mind thoughts and deception always find himself a loser at the end .
kelamitos April 15, 2013
Congratulations, both two sudanes Albeshir is REALLY chang your mind and poltical strategi you need to solve all economical proplems for past 1 year and Albeshir is good Leader for sudan and sudaness people.
and failer to asmara regim.