Absurd to sign agreements if not honored
By Roba Gibia
October 31, 2006 — When Naivasha peace agreement was signed in January 2005, both signatories voiced its commitment to implement the peace accord to the letter. And President Bashir reiterated in many occasions that the painful page of bloodshed and war was over, and all the country’s resources and funds which used to be geared on war will be diverted to the development and construction of war torn areas, and there will be no more shots of guns and no more wailing of women for their children! And we will display to the entire world the good model of democratic governance in Africa. Beside that President Bashir promised to make the unity of country attractive to all Sudanese and south in particular, and that the year 2006 will witness inclusive peace in every part of Sudan, south, west and east.
When the Naivasha peace truck started cruising on peace road, many people knew that the road toward implementation of peace is not plain, due to the many previous dishonored agreements, lack of profound trust and confidence between south and Khartoum and the NCP/NIF desire to grip on power. And many believe that to implement Naivasha peace deal clause by clause, it requires true and faithful commitments from both partners and particularly the senior partner. And many contemplated that the implementation of peace to the letter requires a complete change in NCP/NIF mentality and behavior, and the participation of all Sudanese political parties or powers in the government, and the absolute democratic transformation of Sudan, equality and justice among the Sudanese sons and daughters regardless of race, color, gender and faith or political affiliation. This is the vision of New Sudan. This New Sudan vision doesn’t mean disintegration of Sudan, but it means change in our hearts, change in our mentality, change in our attitude and behavior and to accept that Sudan belongs equally to all Sudanese with equal opportunity and equitable distribution of wealth and development in every corner and part of Sudan.
But the cruising velocity of Naivasha peace truck has been badly retarded by the selective implementation process which has created enormous holes on the Naivasha peace agreement. This retardation has unveiled the bogus face and intentions of the national congress party and its motives behind signing Naivasha agreement. The most crucial clause of Naivasha implementation deal has come to standstill due to premeditated and deliberate desire of NCP/NIF to exterminate Naivasha. President Bashir and his NCP/NIF hardliners rejected experts report on Abyei which is a clear breach of agreement, and sadly enough Abyei remains without formation of administration while we approach second anniversary of CPA. South-north boundary commission, despite its formation, it remained dormant due to Khartoum’s interest and gluttonous desire to run oil rich regions. Then why NCP/NIF appended its signature on CPA? Is it due to international pressure or to buy time and let the issues remain as it is now or to divide and weaken struggling movements and deal with each conflict in isolation! That is the question floating around in the minds of many peace loving people. And indeed Khartoum managed in its strategy and technique of divide and rule to isolate and untie code of contact between the movements and confinement of each movement in its own locality.
When Darfur Peace Agreement was signed in June 2006, it has been welcomed with angry demonstrations within and across Sudan’s borders, due to the fact that the DPA doesn’t meet the actual aspiration and desire of people on the ground. As a result, there has been split among the Darfur movements and formation of new fronts which has thrown more gloomy shadow on the chaotic situation in the region. The peace will never be imposed by force or gun unless through negotiation, and none of the warring parties will win the war. Since signing of the Abuja peace deal, the situation has not changed on the ground, but instead the situation has become more complex and disastrous which requires more genuine approach to bring all the warring parties into the faithful and constructive negotiation to find the common recipe acceptable to all parties. Practically, the implementation of Abuja deal as its current format is almost impossible unless it is tailored or otherwise it is a false perception for Abuja existence.
The signing of Asmara peace agreement between NCP/NIF and the Eastern Front on October 14, 2006 is a step forward in concluding inclusive peace in this war torn country, if only all the signed agreements could be honored! It is easy and simple to sign agreements, but not easy to execute due to its enormous costs. The only player in all these agreements is the ruling party which knows when and how to conclude a treaty and which clauses to be implemented. Thus, it has acquired a false credibility in one hand as a peace maker and in the other it continues to hold the grip of power unilaterally without consultations with its peace partners as stipulated in the interim constitution of Sudan! The concentration of power on the hands of President and his party is the main obstacle in the nation-wide reconciliation and the democratic transformation process. During Asmara peace ceremony, President Bashir reiterated same statement of Naivasha accord “I tell you that we will abide by this agreement. We are totally committed to implement this agreement clause by clause to the letter, and our country’s resources will be diverted to development instead of war”. This is the metaphor and rhetoric of President and his ruling party in influencing public opinion in any concluded treaty, but in fact it has got negative impact on the Sudanese street due to lack of its credibility. People are weary of hearing empty promises, and are expecting to see that those words and statements are translated into practical and tangible reality. And that was obvious, as most people were conservative and voiced their concern, that what is important is the implementation of the agreements and not just signing it.
When the Anya-nya movement started in south in 1955 against Khartoum’s discriminative policy and marginalization, the entire northern regions united against south, and termed Southerners as separatists and called their motives for the uprising as baseless. And merciless war and atrocities was committed against Southerners. And even when SPLM/A movement started in 1983, Khartoum and the northern regions continued to mobilize local population, militias, popular defense forces and Mojahideen against south, till Jihad (holy) war was declared against Southerners. But due to SPLM/A’s clear strategy, policy and vision toward Sudan’s predicament under the New Sudan vision where everyone lives dignitary and with equal opportunities, managed to acquire support and sympathy of the marginalized people of Nuba Mountains and Southern Blue Nile as well as east and western Sudan, and acknowledgement of their own quandaries. Thus, SPLM/A joint hands with Nuba Mountains, Southern Blue Nile, some northern opposition parties and formed political and military alliance against Khartoum government. And that was a clear confession from Sudanese street that south has got a legitimate right to wage a war against Khartoum, which in fact marked a new era in the struggle of marginalized people in Sudan.
Thus, when one scrutinizes the motives of conflicts in Sudan, whether being in south, west or east, the root causes seem to be alike, marginalization and underdevelopment. And none existence of the basic services, is the most predominant and common feature among these areas, despite the fact that each region has got its own locality. But Khartoum never believed that there are marginalized areas in Sudan, but rather deemed that those areas fighting for power and posts. Thus, when Naivasha, Abuja and Asmara agreements were concluded, each locality was offered various positions at the federal government levels including the posts of the First Vice President, assistants and advisors to the President. Those positions are symbolic and honorary just to compensate or as gratitude for those generals for concluding the deal, but in actuality have no impact on the trend of NCP/NIF policy. And that is NCP/NIF strategy of overcoming and making its opponents dormant. And that is obvious in the behavior of NCP/NIF in underestimating, marginalizing and intentionally ignorance of its peace partners, which is in defiant to the concluded agreements and interim constitution of Sudan. According to my view, this partnership has to be invigorated or otherwise there is no need to its existence, as far as the rule of partnership is not honored, and as far as NCP/NIF continues to dictate and suppress its partners. This is not ethics of partnership but rather it is a bullying, totalitarian and military tyranny. Thus, NCP/NIF continues to run the entire institutions and country’s national affairs exclusively, and offered its partners two options, either to execute policies of NCP/NIF as designed or remain spectators and honorary guests. And this is a profound and risky weakness in the partnership and the peace implementation process.
There are lots of speeches, opinion peace of views and the actuality on ground, and one finds it very hard to believe that NCP/NIF has efficiently marginalized and weakened the SPLM within the government of national unity, and has bought several SPLM officials and inserted into SPLM apparatus key individuals whose loyalty is to Khartoum! But due to the unfolding events one is obliged with regret to consent, due to the fact that SPLM within the government of national unity has been almost if not totally overpowered and has got no significant influence on the NCP/NIF in transforming its policy, attitude and behavior toward country’s quandaries and national affairs. And that was evidential in the selective Naivasha implementation clauses, Darfur crisis and the current expulsion of UN envoy Jan Pronk which is a direct blow to Naivasha agreement as well as setback to plight of Darfurians. The offense Pronk committed is uttering the truth which led to his verdict and expulsion, but those who butchered millions of Southerners and still committing atrocities at large scales in Darfur remain unaccountable. Then where is the rule of law, transparency, accountability and liability, if we claim that we are doing the justice!
Here we have to have a complete perception of the whole situation, acknowledge the actuality on the ground, and wonder, why Khartoum signed agreement with SPLM/A. Sudan People’s Liberation Army is the strongest army which Khartoum ever confronted and will never be defeat militarily. In addition, beside twenty-two years of war without defeat, NCP/NIF needed to buy time and change its face before the international community as a peace marker to dilute the world’s mounting pressures. The halt and cessation of hostilities between the NCP/NIF and SPLA in south, gave a breath to Sudan Armed Forces and its proxy militias to reorganize and redeploy its forces and deal with Darfur uprising militarily. Amidst of all these crisis, Khartoum continues to reorganize and equip its forces with modern military equipments from China and Russia for possible future hostilities, which is a really threat to all signed agreements.
I believe many will concur with me that the delivery of CPA came as a result of world’s pressure as well as strong and bold Sudan People’s Liberation Army, which was the dynamic force behind its political leadership to conclude the Naivasha agreement. Thus, the role of SPLA is very crucial and fundamental in Naivasha implementation process and its existence. And it is imperative to government of south Sudan to ensure the transformation of SPLA into contemporary and professional military forces at any cost, and equip it with anti-aircraft missiles and helicopter gun ships and all the necessary tools to guarantee and protect CPA and south Sudan territorial integrity. As if the current trend of Naivasha implementation treaty process continues as it is without any drastic or fundamental change on ground, particularly on Abyei rule and south-north boundary demarcation to determine the exact and accurate oil share accounts, there is great possibility that things will fall apart, leave alone jeopardizing of the 2008 elections and 2011 referendum, and consequently resumption of hostilities, discard and cancellation of CPA. And that was exactly the anxiety of our late leader Dr. John Garang when he said in Nairobi at the CPA signing ceremony on January 9, 2005 that “I hope I will not go to the bush again”. And that is obvious, no one wants to go to the bush again, but what SPLM/A has to do at this context? SPLM/A needn’t to show weakness or wither, but have to fortify and consolidate its position to challenge and face the NCP/NIF politically, and if worse comes militarily. As it is ridiculous to sign agreements, if not honored!
* Roba Gibia is a Sudan Tribune columnist. He can be reached at [email protected]