North, South Sudan armies trade accusations over fresh clashes in border area
November 1, 2010 (KHARTOUM) — Northern and southern Sudan armies are trading accusations over the responsibility for fighting between the two sides occurred last Saturday on the border between Sennar and Upper Nile states.
The two parties agreed that their troops clashed in the morning of Saturday but the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) says that Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) soldiers penetrated inside Upper Nile state and the latter says SPLA troops attacked them inside Sennar state.
In accordance with the security arrangements protocol which is part of the 2005 peace agreement, SAF have to withdraw its troops from southern Sudan border while the SPLA deploys solders south to 1956 border.
Southern Sudan army spokesperson Kuol Diem Kuol, said Sunday that troops from northern Sudan army ambushed SPLA soldiers and returned back to their positions.
“They clashed with about 10 of our soldiers and wounded one officer and then they ran back to their base,” said Kuol.
The two armies have largely observed the ceasefire established by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005, except clashes in Abyei and Malakal. However, different sources underline the growing tension between the two parties who accuse each other of troop buildup ahead of the referendum on southern Sudan independence next January.
SAF spokesperson today released a statement where he said that southern Sudan army penetrated to Al-Zamali area located 5 klm inside Sennar state where they attacked northern troops.
Al-Sawarmi Khaled said they agreed with the SPLA to investigate the attack through the UN peacekeepers and determine who carried out the attack as it was decided by the Joint Defense Board (JDB).
He went further to say they were surprised by the public statements made by the SPLA accusing SAF of ambushing their troops inside southern Sudan border, breaching the ceasefire established by CPA.
Both sides stressed their commitment to implement the signed agreements and to avoid return to war. Talks between the two parties are stalled over Abyei and disputed parts of the north south border.
The Sudanese army spokesperson said the JDB formed a joint committee to probe the incident indicating that UNMIS peacekeepers declined to investigate the attack despite their okay to operate in the northern Sudanese side of 1965 border.
(ST)
Young Nation
North, South Sudan armies trade accusations over fresh clashes in border area
The Northern Sudanese army shouldn’t be playing such mouse and rat game. Do they think the war would be in their favour if it errupt again. They need to be warned that the current SPLA troops are not similar to the former SPLA forces. The former were not strongly armed. The present troops in the South are highly equiped not just with heavy artilaries but also with modern tanks and air bombers. They should really be reminded that should the war start again, it would be described not as government and rebels fighting, but two separate armies fighting a conventional warfare.
Young Nation is BA student at The University Of Queensland, Brisbane
mayom maboung marek
North, South Sudan armies trade accusations over fresh clashes in border area
the incident had been a “deliberate ambush” by SAF. they lay blame at SPLA’s foot, which is totally untrue.
Padiet Deng Alony
North, South Sudan armies trade accusations over fresh clashes in border area
What was said by SPLA spoke person is true they are the one who ambush the SPLA soldier in Boma called Duk Duk north east of Renk county and fire the SPLA soldier. SPLA never breach the CPA since 2005 but you saf with your millitia.donot be in hurry the final win/lose is at the door for you parasites saf.
Thyinka
North, South Sudan armies trade accusations over fresh clashes in border area
This is Arab war propaganda but they will never keep Sudan united using force since they have even failed in Darfur. They are playing with fire (literally) if they think that they can keep the South from exercising its right to separate through a fair and transparent referendum because the alternative is neither pleasant nor favorable to the North.