President Salva Kiir Cannot Be Overthrown Through the Barrel of a Gun
By Abraham Madit Majak
History has spoken clearly—and repeatedly—to South Sudan’s armed political actors: power cannot be seized through the barrel of a gun. President Salva Kiir Mayardit will not be overthrown through military confrontation, insurgency, or rebellion. If political change is to come, it must come through peaceful protest, civic pressure, or credible elections—not through violence that only deepens national suffering.
The SPLM/A-IO and the National Salvation Army (NAS) would do well to revisit the painful lessons of the 2013–2018 civil war. That conflict, among the deadliest in Africa’s recent history, did not deliver political victory to the opposition. Instead, it devastated communities, displaced millions, collapsed the economy, and shattered the very institutions required to govern a viable state. When the guns finally fell silent, no armed group emerged victorious—only a wounded nation struggling to survive.
Dr. Riek Machar’s long and costly attempt to militarily unseat President Kiir ultimately failed. Despite years of fighting, shifting alliances, international pressure, and enormous loss of life, the government remained intact. The outcome of that war should serve as a sobering reminder: armed struggle has consistently failed to deliver regime change in South Sudan. What it has delivered instead is trauma, poverty, and prolonged political paralysis.
Today, renewed rhetoric of confrontation from factions within the SPLM/A-IO, alongside the continued militarization of dissent by NAS, risks dragging the country backward. Such strategies ignore both political reality and widespread public exhaustion. South Sudanese citizens are not calling for another war. They are calling for stability, basic services, accountability, and the opportunity to rebuild lives shattered by decades of conflict.
The uncomfortable truth is this: guns do not create legitimacy. They impose only temporary control, often at the direct expense of innocent civilians. Genuine political authority flows from popular consent, constitutional order, and international credibility. Any opposition movement serious about governing South Sudan must demonstrate a commitment to democratic methods—not perpetual rebellion.
Peaceful protest, civic mobilization, and electoral participation remain the only viable pathways to sustainable political change. These avenues are slow and often frustrating, but they are far less destructive than war. More importantly, they align with the aspirations of a population that has already paid too high a price for political ambition pursued through violence.
South Sudan now stands at a crossroads. The choice is not between President Kiir and armed rebellion; it is between endless war and the difficult work of building a political culture that respects peaceful change. Opposition leaders must abandon the illusion that violence will succeed where it has repeatedly failed. The future of the country depends on learning from history—not reliving its bloodiest chapters.
Opinions expressed in articles published by RSSVP are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Rescue South Sudan Village People. RSSVP assumes no responsibility for the accuracy, validity, or reliability of claims made by contributors.
Author Bio
Abraham Madit Majak is a South Sudanese writer and political commentator with a strong focus on governance, peace processes, and civic accountability. He regularly contributes to public discourse on South Sudan’s political transition, the role of state institutions, and the responsibilities of leadership during critical reform and nation-building periods.
