Home | News    Monday 13 February 2012

Khartoum signals optimism as oil talks with South Sudan starts


February 12, 2012 (KHARTOUM) – Negotiations between the governments of Sudan and South Sudan over oil officially started on Sunday as Khartoum indicated a relaxation in Juba’s decision to halt production of the commodity.

Sudan’s President Omer Hassan al-Bashir (C) walks out with former South African President Thabo Mbeki (L) and South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir Mayardit (2nd R) (Reuters)

The talks were originally scheduled to commence on Friday but were delayed for unknown reason.

Previous rounds of protracted negotiations failed to yield an agreement on a fair charge to transport South Sudan’s oil through Sudan’s infrastructure, triggering a crisis that saw Khartoum confiscating oil and Juba suspending production all together.

The stand off gave rise to heightened tension and frantic diplomatic efforts by regional and international stakeholders to avert renewed conflict as officials from both countries exchanged warnings of renewed war.

Sunday’s talks on oil commenced after Sudan’s delegation, led by the minister of the Presidency, Idris Mohamed Abdul Gadir, and South Sudan’s delegation, led by the secretary general of the ruling Sudan People Liberation Movement (SPLM) Pagan Amum, arrived in Addis Ababa.

Meanwhile, Sudan Tribune has learned that the two sides had exchanged proposals on how to export South Sudan’s oil via Sudan during the opening session of the talks on Sunday.

In a press release issued on the same day, the Sudanese team stated that South Sudan’s government had expressed readiness to resume exporting the country’s oil through Sudan “as soon as the two sides reach a commercial agreement in this regard”.

The release added that the Sudanese delegation had presented its proposals on border demarcation and fees to transport South Sudan’s oil through Sudanese territories.

Khartoum’s team said that its Southern counterpart also presented a proposal on oil transit fees, adding that the session was adjourned to give both sides an opportunity to study each others proposals.

The Sudanese Media Center (SMC), a website closely linked to Khartoum’s intelligence community, quoted a source “close to the talks” as saying that the Southern delegation came to this round of talks with a spirit of rationality that was absent in previous rounds.

“It seems that the Southern delegation after carefully discussing [Juba’s decision to halt oil production] with oil companies and the alternative routes has concluded that there is no option but to transport oil through Sudan,” the source added.

It is not clear what chances of success this round of talks has in view of the fact that the positions of the ex-war foes on transit fees remain far apart.

Khartoum says it wants to $32 per oil, a figure regarded by Juba as greatly inflated and outside of international norms.

South Sudan took with it three quarters of Sudan’s daily oil production of 500,000 barrels when it seceded in July under a 2005 peace deal that ended more than two decades of civil wars between the two sides.


Comments on the Sudan Tribune website must abide by the following rules. Contravention of these rules will lead to the user losing their Sudan Tribune account with immediate effect.

- No inciting violence
- No inappropriate or offensive language
- No racism, tribalism or sectarianism
- No inappropriate or derogatory remarks
- No deviation from the topic of the article
- No advertising, spamming or links
- No incomprehensible comments

Due to the unprecedented amount of racist and offensive language on the site, Sudan Tribune tries to vet all comments on the site.

There is now also a limit of 400 words per comment. If you want to express yourself in more detail than this allows, please e-mail your comment as an article to comment@sudantribune.com

Kind regards,

The Sudan Tribune editorial team.
  • 13 February 2012 07:44, by backtoschool

    Oil oil no way for Khartuom again, you lose your chance befor.

    • 13 February 2012 07:50, by omoni jr.

      just give them $1 per barrel

      • 13 February 2012 08:40, by Land-of-Cush

        This article has states nothing, but just wants to keep people in touch with this website. Reporter must tell the exactly the figures proposed by both sides to make full understanding to readers but i can’t see this at all.

      • 13 February 2012 16:01, by Acinitos

        What a excuse me!!

    • 13 February 2012 08:28, by SeekingTruth


    • 13 February 2012 15:55, by Acinitos

      Daydream forget about your optimism about the oil.the last test you can have is the one you have stolen.

  • 13 February 2012 07:59, by George Bol

    320,000 barrels/day.
    North demand $32/barrel.
    320,000*32=10.24 millions/day
    Now, 10.24*365 days=$ 3.74 billions/year.

    Internationally, a barrel cost $2.
    So, 320,000*2= $ 640,000/day
    $ 0.64 *365/days=$233.60 millions/year.
    The South will be in deficits.
    Are Khartoum normal?

    • 13 February 2012 12:09, by mohammed ali

      Bol, where do you get a barrel of oil for $ 2 ? I will by it from for $ 92, your profit will be $ 90 per barrel. 1 barre costs $ 100 dear! Are you normal?!

      • 14 February 2012 01:19, by George Bol


        First, you need to know the transportation fees, the actual selling prices, barrels to be sold, and the international transit fees before conversing. Ok! if the South has the total barrels of 320,000 and the the North demand $32 per barrel while the South proposed $2.00 for a barrel.I know you nothing about random sample.You indeed abnormal.

      • 14 February 2012 03:23, by George Bol

        Of the survey participants 80 percent predicted the price for a barrel of oil will rise to be somewhere between $50 and $100 per barrel by June 2010.The South can not give away their 40% for transportation cost. If we include external factors,then the South will have 50% left as their revenue.

  • 13 February 2012 08:01, by Sundayw

    Sudan Tribune is again spreading the false information from Sudan Media Center. Why don’t this news organization become a mouthpiece for the NCP regime.
    First, the SPLM delegation must not be tricked into false sense of normalcy here because the NCP will do a switch-and-bate as soon as South restart oil production. Nothing has been resolved yet. Besides, Sudan has attached rebellions to pipeline.

    • 13 February 2012 10:57, by Logic

      Abo Dirty Jalabia, Is a blind loyalist, nothing you say to him will change his mind, he thinks he’s a patriot by supporting everything the NCP does. The truth is this, the north’s infrastructure is the best option but not for $32 pb, the NCP know this, what they’re hoping for is half this amount but due to $1 offer by the south, this desire is also far fetched hence their frustration.

  • 13 February 2012 08:16, by George Bol


    Only business professionals should recommend on the oil issue(transit fees)but not you. If the South pay $ 3.74 billions a year for 320,000 a barrel,then what benefits are we South Sudan gaining? base on this slight calculation, it seems that we are sharing our South oil and the North are getting about 85% from our oil. Can we afford it? Pagan Amum and our SPLM teams knows? thanks

  • 13 February 2012 09:05, by mosa mel

    Guys, You still don’t study the NCP behaviors. They are the one change spirit of previous talk not S govt delegations. Border and Abeyi issues must complete before oil resume operation to Sudan and that it all. Now they start again missleading the world. They want to show the world South have no alternative rather let oil run to Sudan.

  • 13 February 2012 09:41, by Emporio

    some one tell president of south Sudan you no long vice President of Sudan, Omar he is your counterpart that mean you should be walking with him side by side not behind him,i don’t know who post this ridicules picture,,,,,

  • 13 February 2012 13:48, by Emmanuel Ajang Solomon

    Why are u comparing those Ukrain and Ruassia? we have our own problems and they need to be settle only when 1 Government is out from the 2.

  • 14 February 2012 03:10, by Daniel Buolmawei

    Well, Pagan Amum, no oil deal, absolutely, no oil deal. All you have to talk about at the moment are issue of Abyei, border demarcation, citizenships, and ways to bring back lands taken by Khartoum that are geographically not their lands. If they don’t agree, then we have our swords and we ready to take them back by any means.

  • 14 February 2012 03:25, by Daniel Buolmawei

    “It seems that the Southern delegation after carefully discussing [Juba’s decision to halt oil production] with oil companies and the alternative routes has concluded that there is no option but to transport oil through Sudan,” the source added."

    See! They think if we sign the deal, it is because we have no option left, but to give up to transport our oil through Sudan. I won’t sign it. Never.

The following ads are provided by Google. SudanTribune has no authority on it.

Sudan Tribune

Promote your Page too

Latest Comments & Analysis

Crisis with woman’s face 2021-03-07 20:11:51 By Antonio Guterres As the world marks International Women’s Day in the midst of a global pandemic, one stark fact is clear: the COVID-19 crisis has a woman’s face. The pandemic is worsening (...)

Resolving insurgency in South Sudan’s Equatoria 2021-03-06 07:37:31 Comment on South Sudan Other War: Resolving the Insurgency in Equatoria Crisis Group Africa Briefing No 169, 25 February 2021. By Dr Lam Akol The International Crisis Group Africa Briefing No. (...)

The 6th Celebration of Zero Discrimination Day: Ending Inequalities! 2021-03-01 18:04:51 By: Bol Khan The 1st of March is a Zero Discrimination Day. It's a Day that holds a celebration aiming to end discrimination and inequalities against all vulnerable and minority groups. In (...)


Latest Press Releases

Sudan: Performing arts is not a crime, assaulting women and artists is! 2020-09-20 08:54:28 The Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa (SIHA) Sudan is still struggling with militant Islamist ideology KHARTOUM: Central Khartoum Primary Court issued a verdict against five (...)

Civil Society Statement in Response to The Law of Various Amendments 2020-08-14 07:11:00 A Collaborative Civil Society Statement in Response to The Law of Various Amendments (Abolishing and Amending Provisions Restricting Freedom) – Exposing ‘a wolf in sheep’s clothing’ Sudanese women (...)

Remarks by SRF leaders at the Friend of Sudan meeting on peace 2020-08-13 07:58:58 Chairman of the Friends of Sudan Conference, Your Excellency, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, The Prime Minister of Sudan and the participating team from the (...)


Copyright © 2003-2021 SudanTribune - All rights reserved.