Sudan Parties differ on peacekeeping during transitional period
NAIROBI, Feb 10, 2004 (IRIN) — Differences have emerged between Sudanese warring parties over the structure and mandate of a proposed United Nations-supported peace-monitoring team to operate during the crucial six-and-a-half-year transitional period planned to follow the signing of a final peace agreement.
The differences arose following a hint by United States Secretary of State Colin Powell last week that up to 10,000 international monitors could be deployed in Sudan once a final deal is reached.
“In addition to Cote d’Ivoire and what we’re doing in Liberia, if we get a settlement in Sudan, which I think is likely if we can solve the problem of Abyei [one of the three disputed regions], then there will be another requirement there for 8,000 to 10,000 UN monitors, so another bill,” Powell told journalists during a round-table discussion on African issues in New York on Friday. “And we have finite – believe it or not – we have finite resources. So we want to make sure that we are sizing these missions properly, and that’s what the discussion is,” he added.
Samson Kwaje, the official spokesman of the rebel Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A), told IRIN on Monday that Sudan not only needed monitors but also peacekeepers on the ground to ensure that both parties fully implemented the terms of the peace accord during the transitional period.
He said two forces which had been fighting for the last 20 years could not be trusted to implement a ceasefire agreement without outside help, going by the large number of ceasefire violations which had taken in place so far. “We must have peacekeepers, because you cannot separate two forces that have been fighting for the last 20 years with just a monitoring team,” Kwaje said.
The Khartoum government, on the other hand, has ruled out a role for peacekeepers, and instead said it preferred the idea of peace monitors, similar to those already being implemented under the facilitation of Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD).
Sa’id Khatib, the Sudanese government’s official spokesman, told IRIN on Monday that there had been no consultations at any level of the peace process on the need for peacekeepers. “This is the first time the peacekeepers issue is arising. It has never come up in the peace process itself that there is any need for peacekeepers in Sudan after the final agreement,” he said.
“All we have talked about is the need for monitoring the peace agreement on the ground,” he added. “This issue [of peacekeepers] did not arise from the IGAD process, from the UN, or from the US observers in the peace process itself,” Khatib said.
According to Khatib, it was decided under the IGAD forum that the peacekeeping role would be carried out by a combined force manned jointly by the Sudanese government army and the SPLA, in accordance with an agreement on security arrangements both parties signed late last year. Any changes, including the peacekeeping should come out of the IGAD process, and not “imposed” by the US government, he added. “We have agreed to a joint integrated unit of both SPLA and the Sudanese army to make sure peace is maintained.”
A report by a UN planning mission set up last year at the request of the Security Council to determine the issue of Sudan’s peaceful transition was currently under discussion by UN member states, a UN observer told IRIN. “This is not a big surprise,” the observer said. “This is one of the issues under discussion within the UN and by member states.”
It was also still unclear whether the mandate of such a team would be limited to monitoring or include peacekeeping, the observer added.
According to Kwaje, IGAD countries are willing to contribute troops to Sudan. He urged the international community to endorse a peacekeeping plan for the transitional period. “I don’t think the international community will allow fighting to resume in Sudan once the peace agreement is signed,” he said.
He said that by opposing peacekeepers the government was planning to sabotage the transitional period. “What are they afraid of? They are worried because they want to violate the peace agreement and sabotage the transitional period,” Kwaje asserted.
Talks to end the country’s 20-year civil war are to resume on 17 February after an adjournment requested by the Sudanese government delegation.
The talks, being held in the Kenyan town of Naivasha, had made substantial progress on issues of wealth-sharing and security arrangements during the transitional period, but still face hurdles on the issues of power-sharing arrangements and the status of the disputed areas, namely Abyei, the Nuba mountains and southern Blue Nile.
Under IGAD, three separate monitoring teams have been set up in Sudan to supervise several ceasefire agreements between the government and the SPLM/A. They include the Joint Monitoring Commission (JMC), an internationally sponsored team set up to supervise the ceasefire deal signed in January 2002 between the government and SPLM/A on the Nuba mountains region.
The Civilian Protection Monitoring Unit (CPMT), an initiative of the US government, was set up following the March 2002 agreement to ensure that the warring parties did not attack civilians. In February 2003, the parties signed an addendum to a previous agreement on cessation of hostilities, recommending the setting up of a Verification and Monitoring Team, whose mandate was to complement that of the CPMT.
Apart from the operational problems they face in the vast underdeveloped parts of the country, the monitoring bodies have been criticised for lacking teeth to enforce the respective ceasefires.