Oil fields in dispute along South North border must halt their operations

By Isaiah Abraham

January 27, 2012 — Differences over oil charges between two countries of the former Sudan have reached an alarming stage. The two sides accuse one another of failing the agreement on the oil negotiations. There have been simmering problems before and after independence of South Sudan, but oil dispute is the latest, yet a confrontation each side doesn’t want to lose.

Sudan says South Sudan has not been paying transit fees, and that it has taken oil in lieu of payment. But the claim was denied by companies (China’s National Petroleum Corp, Malaysia’s Petronas, Indian’s ONGC Videsh etc) working in that field. South Sudan owes Sudan little money, to be exact. It has been paying, and also vigorously tried to find a ground for Khartoum to lower its bar on its economic ambition to seal a loop hole (45% of Annual Income) left about after South Sudan departure.

Juba is reported to have proposed a financial package in the tune of 2.6 billion in the next four years, a friendly token offered for the viability of the Sudan national economy. Khartoum however turned down the offer. Khartoum insisted that it has to be paid arrears as well as new charges per barrel ($36). South Sudan rebuffed it outright given other experiences elsewhere.

Oil refineries are built along Northern territories and Khartoum has since started to bully South Sudan over the oil resource, if Global Witness of 2008-2009 is anything to go by. Juba sought a third party but Khartoum never backed down on its demand for fresh charges and whatever other claims before it. Talks reached a deadend.

The Council of Ministers for the Government of the Republic of South Sudan on Friday 20 January, 2012 passed a resolution to indefinitely shut down the oil production until things become clearer. South Sudan National Legislative Assembly on their side moved a notch higher -after approving the decision unanimously to stop oil flow to the market -by authorizing the executive to take the matter of unilateral stealing of oil to the international court. A minister of Justice for South Sudan is believed to be working out preliminary legal consultations on the way forward

A day later after the House passed the Bill, a Memoranda of Understanding was signed with a sisterly country called Kenya. The agreement is to allow the Republic of South Sudan to build and own oil pipelines that shall pass through the Republic of Kenya to the Lamu port, pending further agreement. The two governments and their populace considered this move an important diplomatic gesture to thaw the relationship between South Sudan and Kenya, given the later effort to bring peace to the Sudan.

Now that the dispute over oil has taken a twist, there is an urged need to halt oil operations along South North borders, until border demarcation work is completed. This should be an agenda for South Sudan team in Addis Ababa-Ethiopia. We are hearing that the Panthou now renamed Heglig is still pumping enough oil for the Republic of the Sudan, how sure are we that the North will not deplete it before the border actual demarcation ruling takes place. Large areas along side that block are Southern lands, and Juba must ensure their security and protection.

The two countries can’t operate with no clear borders. Khartoum has always played mouth and cat game on this matter, but now that we have a strong case, oil wells are strewn along the borders of the two countries are to be internationally monitored and be closed. Our president and his team are congratulated for a job well done. The decision should have been yesterday, but the political waters of that period.

Our people in the ten states have also expressed their support by venting anger against Khartoum on stealing of its resources. This is a warning that Khartoum shouldn’t assume to blackmail our people again like before. We want our oil wells back from the North, and no return to oil transportation through the Republic of the Sudan. If Kiir changes his mind, our people will request him to step aside.

I heard some people (traitors in fact) complaining that the oil shouldn’t have been stopped, as it is the only source of survival for the government in Juba. That is partly true, but if someone refuses to negotiate in good faith and then confiscated your stocks at gun points, what will you have done in that catch 22 situation if you were the president?

I know my government isn’t sleeping but planning to keep things running. But for the sake of the situation at hand, they must not leave any economic stone unturned. Tough times require tough measures, they say. Our government must start to apply austerity measures immediately. May be that was a blessing in a different form for us to exploit other means other than oil. I want the government to cut hefty allowances for constitutional post holders, do away with some Commissions that aren’t productive or else go for loan while working on the pipe lines within a short period of time. Mr. Salvatore, sir, my hat is down for you!

Isaiah Abraham lives in Juba; he’s on [email protected]