The killings in South Sudan in the last couple of days has attracted the world’s attention, with calls for arms embargo.

What is puzzling is that even after the Southerners had their way in the epoch-making referendum in 2011, which subsequently led to their secession from Sudan, the youngest nation in Africa does not seem to be at peace with itself.

Surprisingly, the two tribal factions that are now feuding over power and consequently causing instability in the nascent democracy had hitherto been strong allies. They all fought against the predominantly Arab and Muslim north that is now peacefully under the rule of Sudan President, Omar al-Bashir.

The crisis in Juba can be traced to a fractious allegation of coup in 2013, which South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir, who is an ethnic Dinka, made against his former vice president Riek Machar, who is a Nuer. The two camps have since been fighting on and off.

But being in a continent where generally politics and national resources are tribalised, it was not rocket science that the quest for South Sudan’s peace and prosperity was going to be tumultuous.

Even though there are a lot of commonalities that unite us as African communities, our mindsets have become enslaved by political elites who incite inter-communal for their selfish gain.

The bloodbath in Sudan was occasioned by such elites who started the ‘us against them’ conflict between the North and the South, and now with nothing more to gain from that since the secession of the South Sudan was approved through a referendum; those elites have resorted to another version of ‘us against them’ to their advantage, but to the detriment of their followers and the progress of the infant country.

Africa must heed the wise words of Mahatma Gandhi that: “There is enough for everyone’s need, but not enough for everyone’s greed”.

Those who are being used as cannon fodders in such wars should know that when the politics of a country go haywire, it is the ordinary folks like them who suffer.