As South Sudan marks fifteen years of independence, celebrations must be accompanied by honest deep reflections and sincere thoughts about the way forward.

Independence was never an end in itself; it was not a flag ceremony; it was a promise of justice, dignity and prosperity after decades of persecution, marginalization and devastating civil wars. That promise remains largely unfulfilled.

The roots of South Sudan’s liberation struggle can be traced to the 1955 Torit Mutiny and the resurgence of yet another protracted civil war in Malual-Chaat, Bor in 1983.

These rural based civil wars were results of systematic political exclusion, economic persecution and neglect and attempts to impose a singular national identity upon a culturally diverse society. As Prof. Francis Mading Deng argues, Sudan’s conflict was fundamentally “a conflict of identities,” rooted in unequal political participation, exclusive economic empowerment and the struggle over race, culture, religion and power (Deng, War of Visions: Conflict of Identities in the Sudan, 1995).

When South Sudan became independent on 9th July 2011, millions including billions across the globe believed the sacrifices of generations had finally yielded freedom. Yet freedom without accountable governance has proved insufficient and betrayed those hopes.

The aspirations of liberation struggle have gradually been overshadowed by insecurity, corruption, economic decline and institutional fragility.

Currently, many citizens face unemployment, delayed salaries, inflation, a depreciating South Sudanese Pound, inadequate healthcare, poor education, weak infrastructure, food insecurity and limited investment in agriculture despite the country’s enormous fertile land and reliable rainfalls throughout the year. Communities continue to experience localized violence, cattle-related conflicts, fatal road ambushes and mass displacement.

These are not merely governance failures; they represent the erosion of the social contract between the state and its people.

Political scientists would describe this as state capture or state-hijack, where public institutions increasingly serve elite interests instead of the broader national interest.

From the perspective of Hans Morgenthau’s Realist Theory, political competition revolves around power and survival. In contrast, Robert Keohane’s Liberal Institutionalism reminds us that sustainable peace depends upon strong institutions, accountability, the rule of law and cooperation. South Sudan’s tragedy lies in the imbalance between political power and institutional development.

Prof. Jok Madut Jok has consistently argued that South Sudan’s greatest challenge after independence has not been the absence of resources but the absence of effective governance and a coherent national developmental objective(state vision).

He argues that while the country made important institutional gains after independence, insecurity, economic hardship and weak national cohesion continue to undermine state-building (Jok Madut Jok, South Sudan: A Politics of Demise or a Vision for Progress?, The Sudd Institute, 2013).

Responsibility for the country’s predicament cannot rest upon one political actor alone.

The ruling SPLM bears the primary responsibility as the governing party, but opposition movements, holdout groups and other political elites have likewise contributed to prolonged instability through recurring political confrontation and failure to prioritize national interests above partisan aims.

For these very reasons as in regard to scheduled December 2026 elections, credible national elections require more than schedule timelines. Elections conducted amid insecurity, weak institutions, unresolved constitutional questions and limited political trust risk becoming a contest over power rather than an expression of popular sovereignty.

Democracy cannot flourish where institutions remain fragile and public confidence is low.

The country therefore requires a genuinely inclusive National Round Table Conference involving the SPLM, within opposition parties, holdout groups, civil society, religious sects, traditional leaders, women, youth, academics and the private sector.

Such a national conference should solely focus on constitutional reform, security-sector transformation, anti-corruption measures, economic diversification, agricultural revitalization and institutional independence.

South Sudan deserves better for its people have paid an extraordinary price for freedom of all rights including sustained stability and sustained economic progress and prosperity for all.

The generation that fought for liberation did not sacrifice so that future generations would inherit poverty, fear, insecurity and political uncertainty. They envisioned a Republic governed by justice, accountability and equal opportunities for all including a democratic political participation.

As we commemorate the fifteenth anniversary of our independence, patriotism should not be measured by unquestioning loyalty to leaders but by unwavering vowed conviction and commitment to the Republic and its people.

Loving one’s country also means demanding better governance. That’s standing up for the country!

South Sudan possesses abundant natural resources all over its territorial cover, resilient and strong people with immense human potential. What remains uncertain is whether political leadership can rise above factional interests to fulfil the unfinished promise of independence.

History will judge this generation not by how loudly it celebrated independence, but by whether it transformed liberation into democracy, stability and development.

South Sudan deserves nothing less!

This author is a South Sudanese scholar based in Juba, South Sudan. He is reachable through his private address.