27/11/2025
The Insecurities, Looming Tribalism, and Political Blunders in Western Equatoria State:
An Ethical and Comprehensive Opinion
By Joseph Apai Arkangelo
Political Analyst and Public Opinion Writer
The persistent insecurity and tribal polarization in Western Equatoria State, particularly in Tambura, have been widely misrepresented as a conflict between Azande and Balanda communities or blamed on specific individuals. This narrative is misleading and dangerously simplistic. The root cause of the crisis was not Gen. Alfred Futuyo Karaba, Dr. Kennedy Gaaniko Baime, the Azande, or the Balanda. Rather, it was a politically engineered struggle over State power, representation, and influence, driven by competing agendas within the framework of the power-sharing arrangements established by the Revitalized Peace Agreement.
Before the 2018 Peace Agreement, Tambura, Nzara, Ezo, Nagero, Rangu, and Nadiangere were strongholds of SPLM-IO influence with combination of learned politicians and brave soldiers from both the Azande and Balanda Communities. After the Revitalized Peace Agreement, there happened a huge defection of senior SPLM-IO Generals and Politicians to the SSPDF, under the influence of the SPLM powerful politicians in the State, significantly destabilized Western Equatoria State and rout the conflict. These defections split existing forces across the counties into two rival camps: SPLM-IO loyalists and those who followed the defected Generals.
Ezo, Nzara, Yambio Counties managed this disruption with remarkable political maturity. The strong leadership of the County Commissioners, who understood local dynamics and security concerns, helped maintain unity among the forces. Tambura and Nagero however, lacked this balance. The SPLM controlled the County leadership through a loyal Commissioner, while the SPLM-IO retained military dominance on the ground. This mismatch in political and military authority created immediate tension over power and control.
The conflict began subtly, with accusations, mistrust, and power struggles, but gradually escalated into ethnic incitement. SPLM-IO forces in Tambura included a considerable number of Balanda soldiers. This led to the politically fabricated perception that the Balanda intended to seize Tambura. Azande civilians were told that the Balanda planned to take their ancestry land, while the Balanda were told that the Azande aimed to drive them out of the land they term as ancestry land too. These narratives were not organic community sentiments; they were deliberate political provocations orchestrated by actors within both SPLM-IG and SPLM-IO seeking to secure county control and gain favor from their respective parties.
The struggle for control extended into military recruitment. SPLM-IO loyalists, under pressure to demonstrate military strength, recruited heavily from the Balanda community. Similarly, defected SPLM-IO generals aligned with SPLM-IG and SSPDF recruited predominantly from the Azande. Soldiers absorbed the same divisive propaganda being circulated among civilians, deepening militarized tribal divisions.
Yet historically, the Azande and Balanda are not enemies. They have coexisted for over 200 years, long before the revolutionary era of King Gbudue. Together, they fought foreign invaders, intermarried, raised mixed families, and maintained their distinct cultural identities. Both groups are of Bantu origin, and their deep historical kinship is undeniable. Even during periods of disagreement under King Gbudue’s reign, conflicts were quickly resolved, allowing both communities to continue supporting each other in joint operations.
Since 2020, political actors in both SPLM-IG and SPLM-IO have exploited identity politics to weaken one another. Their agenda was simple: dismantle the influence of one political party and replace it with another. This reckless strategy has resulted in severe insecurity in Tambura, displacement of civilians, and deepening mistrust between communities who have historically lived as brothers and sisters. These developments offer harsh lessons: tribal recruitment into the army, identity-based politics, and geographically targeted propaganda are destructive practices that undermine national unity and fuel instability.
The political vacuum following the signing of the Revitalized Peace Agreement made matters worse. Western Equatoria State went longer than any other without a governor, until Lt. Gen. Alfred Futuyo Karaba was finally appointed under the SPLM-IO quota. His arrival in Yambio was met with overwhelming support due to his longstanding role in leading the Arrow Boys to repel the LRA. Before the formation of the full State Cabinet, Gen. Futuyo performed exceptionally well and was recognized as one of the best-performing governors during the Governor’s Forum in Juba.
However, after the Deputy Governor and Cabinet Ministers, representing various parties to the Agreement, were appointed, disagreements began to emerge. Policy differences escalated into political conflict, and insecurity in the State intensified. When major SPLM-IO Generals defected to SSPDF and SPLM-IG, the political crisis deepened. Gen. Futuyo faced numerous accusations, including mismanagement, favoritism, illiteracy, corruption, and administrative weaknesses.
He was also alleged to have aligned himself with radical Balanda politicians to retain influence. Additional claims included involvement in money counterfeiting and resistance to traveling to Juba for investigation, until he was eventually relieved of his position by President Salva Kiir Mayardit. This removal provided an opportunity for him to flee to the bush. Further allegations suggested that he may have used State revenue to fund radical Balanda elements involved in the Tambura conflict. Gen. Futuyo, on several occasions, publicly claimed that certain Azande political figures were attempting to unseat him.
These developments highlight a broader institutional failure: when politics becomes personalized, tribalized, and weaponized, the entire State suffers.
Conclusion: A Call for Ethical Leadership and National Unity
The crisis in Western Equatoria State was never a tribal confrontation, it was the consequence of political manipulation, partisan competition, and unethical leadership. Leaders who use ethnic identity as a weapon for political advantage betray national values and place communities in danger.
Moving forward, Western Equatoria and South Sudan as a whole, must embrace ethical leadership rooted in nationalism, integrity, and accountability. Soldiers should serve the nation, not tribal or partisan interests. Politicians must prioritize ideas, policies, and public service over tribal mobilization and political propaganda.
Only through truth, reconciliation, and principled leadership can Western Equatoria overcome the shadows of insecurity and tribal division and rebuild a peaceful, united, and stable society.
Contact Information
Joseph Apai Arkangelo
Political Analyst and Public Opinion Writer
📞 +211 921 606 616
📧 [email protected]
