The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill
© Getty Images
As the world’s newest nation collapses, the internationally-backed peace process risks making a bad situation worse
In its short, sad history as an independent country, South Sudan has known more years of war than peace. In the fight for independence, millions of lives were lost to civil war. Eventual freedom from Sudan came in 2011.
But only two and a half years after independence, a new civil war within South Sudan, sparked by competition among the country’s venal elite, collapsed the state and precipitated the exodus of a third of the population. Despite billions of dollars per year in aid, millions more are starving. Investigations by the United Nations, the African Union and others have documented repeated war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Seven years after independence, South Sudan’s warring political class finds itself back in Khartoum. Amidst its own ongoing economic crisis, the government of Sudan has seized the reins of a stuttering peace process, motivated by hopes its intervention would lead to greater oil revenue from South Sudan, which pays Khartoum to export its crude.
Through a mix of coercion and incentives, the Sudanese have overseen the signing of a series of vague, problematic and contradictory agreements. And now, Khartoum has set August 5 as the date for signature of a new peace agreement.
A year ago, I argued to a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee that the troubled regional mediation process deserved another chance to succeed, and even if talks were ineffectual, could be of value if they served to contain the conflict. But the mediation’s potential has been largely wasted, and the conflict has instead metastasized.
While diplomats may argue that supporting even an imperfect mediation process is better than having no process at all, backing a flawed agreement that could incentivize the intensification of fighting is wrong: The proposed text returns power to the same discredited and corrupt politicians for another three-year term, without the necessary, viable reforms to resolve the country’s humanitarian, economic, or security predicaments.
An already factionalized and corrupt military elite will likely loot what is left of the country’s wealth, well aware that the proposed security and governance arrangements are likely to fail. And those left out of the deal may now see violent overthrow of the government as the only available recourse.
While the White House has rightly voiced concern about the direction of the current peace process, most of the international community, including African states, the UK, the European Union and China remain supportive of the Khartoum talks.
More must be done by the United States to convince its allies and other friends of South Sudan that any agreement, should, at minimum, not make things any worse. If not corrected, certain provisions in the agreement may directly spur new violence.
The deal sets up ambiguous security arrangements in the capital, Juba, where the conflict started in 2013 and where an earlier transitional government collapsed in 2016; calls for the prohibitively expensive, unrealistic cantonment of hundreds of thousands of men, which will be inevitably partial, selective and inequitable, becoming a cause for further rivalry and new militia recruitment; and, sets a false timetable for the unification of a badly fractured security sector, which could easily lead to military disintegration. Any of these factors could set off new rounds of conflict that could endure for years to come.
In the interests of a genuine peace and an end to the suffering of millions of South Sudanese, the United States should also urgently use its leverage with the government of Sudan. Khartoum desires normalization of its relationship with Washington and is therefore receptive to American concerns. But these concerns need to be explicitly conveyed, with alternative options advocated, particularly on the security arrangements. Acknowledging that the peace process needs a re-think and look beyond power-sharing to new models of governance, would be the next step.
The United States is right to be frustrated at the protracted intransigence of the South Sudanese elites who have continued this war, and at the limitations of the regional peace process. But frustration will not stop the grave risks of an irrevocably flawed agreement. Urgent action to change course is required.
Aly Verjee is a visiting expert at the U.S. Institute of Peace, and advisor to the regional mediation for South Sudan from 2014-15.
Newer articles:
- South Sudan's peace agreement: Good news or more trouble ahead? - 06/08/2018 08:29
- South Sudan Government and rebels sign peace deal to end five years of civil war - 05/08/2018 23:22
- South Sudan Leaders Make Another Attempt at Peace - 05/08/2018 11:23
- South Sudan foes sign final power-sharing deal - 05/08/2018 11:14
- Efforts with non-signatories of south Sudan governance deal to continue in Nairobi: Sudan FM - 04/08/2018 18:00
Older news items
- South Sudan President to Sign Revised Power-sharing Deal - 03/08/2018 20:23
- A mother's choice in South Sudan: Risk rape or starve - 03/08/2018 17:15
- Opinion: The loose solidarity in South Sudan’s media sector - 03/08/2018 14:29
- South Sudan's unending conflict is disappointing, says Raila - 03/08/2018 12:51
- South Sudan's Salva Kiir: New peace deal will not collapse - 03/08/2018 12:44
Latest news items (all categories):
- UN experts say South Sudan is close to securing a $13 billion oil-backed loan from a UAE company - 18/05/2024 11:54
- DRC, South Sudan units top Equity’s earnings in first quarter - 18/05/2024 11:49
- Innuendos and tittle tattle of Kiir's regime - 18/05/2024 11:44
- South Sudan government, rebel groups sign pact to achieve lasting peace - 18/05/2024 09:58
- إلى متى ينظر الجميع إلى الفيل و يطعنون ظله..؟ - 15/05/2024 21:51
Random articles (all categories):
- Sudan: ’Give us back the keys to the country’ - 13/10/2022 01:07
- South Sudan: Rumbek Court Sentences Government Official to Two Years in Prison - 20/05/2013 08:15
- Ambassador Yohannes Meets South Sudan's Foreign Minister - 24/09/2021 01:44
- Sudan intensifies bombing of disputed town - Atlanta Journal Constitution - 16/04/2012 13:26
- South Sudan contributes $15 million to WFP for humanitarian response - 11/05/2023 08:04
Popular articles:
- Who is the darkest person in the world, according to Guinness World Record? - 25/10/2022 02:34 - Read 35536 times
- No oil in troubled waters - 25/03/2014 15:02 - Read 21875 times
- School exam results in South Sudan show decline - 01/04/2012 17:58 - Read 20767 times
- NDSU student from South Sudan receives scholarship - In-Forum - 29/09/2012 01:44 - Read 17452 times
- With prisons full, South Sudan to introduce mobile courts to clear backlog of cases - 11/10/2012 11:29 - Read 14236 times