As previously discussed, the post-CPA autochthonous hakuma in Gogrial had reasons to both cite the importance of the dead while also not being bound by them. Claims over land and demands for armed labour often drew on ideas of kinship and entangled commitments to deceased kin. At the same time, government authority wanted to push against these restraints especially when it stopped them shaping peace and war.
In recognition of the faults of the Pan Acier case, the Kal Kuel peace agreement signed at the end of 2008 forewent compensation;
1 Leaders of Alek North Payam, group discussion, Lietnhom, May 2012. the parties agreed to ‘forsake all claims to losses of lives, stolen and looted cattle and property destroyed’.
2 Kal Kuel Covenant, 2008. Cattle were not claimed, even when they were visible in the other group’s herd.
3 Leaders of Alek North Payam, group discussion, Lietnhom, May 2012. Chiefs were also empowered by the Kal Kuel peace agreement.
As with Wunlit, Kal Kuel in practice asserted that peace did not demand the exchange of compensation. Yet, with this came the problem of the moral and spiritual demands of the dead. Without the exchange of compensation, either the demands of the dead could now be ignored or the obligations to fund a posthumous wife now fell to the family. The family not only lost their relative but had to find bride wealth. Their hearts were not cooled, and revenge was often still demanded.
As political leaders in the
hakuma had eaten together in Addis in 2014 (see the opening description in the Introduction to this book), chiefs also ate together in the 2018 Ajiep meeting and this was seen as an affront to the dead. These chiefs had not reconciled and the dead from both sides had not been appeased. Many still upheld that this carried dangers of pollution. One chief vocally complained that by eating together they were disregarding the dead. A woman echoed this complaint during the formal proceedings: ‘Now we eating together yet we have really killed ourselves’.
4 Legislator, speech Ajiep Peace Conference, 21 April 2018. The assertion to forget the dead was often visible in other parts of these peace meetings and agreements. For example, most discussion at the 2005 Mayen Rual conference was silent on the question of how to respond to the deaths of people. At two moments during the conference, two different totals of dead were stated – one at seventy and one at just over a hundred and twenty.
5 Meeting facilitator. However, there was no discussion around these posited figures. This was in contrast to longer discussions over cattle.
Even the governor’s summary executions in 2018 were interpreted as an affront to the dead. Because Thiik had MABIORDIT and was such a fearsome fighter, his family had been intentionally targeted by people from Gogrial West in the 2016–17 conflict. All his close family, with the exception of one brother, had been killed. He spoke explicitly about his spiritual and moral obligation to still seek revenge. As peace would not bring justice or compensation for the dead, he violently sought resolution through revenge.