The dilemma of Juba Peace Agreement
November 22, 2022 (KHARTOUM) – The express or tacit support of the October 25, 2021coup by the armed groups based on the Juba Peace Agreement (JPA) changed the regard of the Sudanese in the war-affected areas to the armed groups and negatively affected their legitimacy.
Nowadays, the political process based on the constitutional proposals drafted by the Sudanese Bar Association Steering Committee includes the review of the contested peace agreement. Detractors say how a peace agreement can be superior to the constitutional declaration, and point to another point, which is the DDR process as the armed groups would keep their arms during the elections and would give up their weapons once the election wrapped.
On November 19, the Spokesman for the Forces for Freedom and Change (FFC) Gaffar Hassan stressed that four issues including the JPA must be discussed within the political process aiming to end the coup.
The armed groups refuse to review the peace pact
The signatory groups unanimously refuse to amend the agreement negotiated with the military component saying that such a process would lead to nullifying the deal.
Mohamed Zakaria, a leading member of the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), and an official spokesman for the National Consensus Forces (NCF) which includes the Sudan Liberation Movement of Minni Minnawi (SLM-MM), affirmed their categorical rejection of any amendment that could be made to the Juba Peace Agreement. He told Sudan Tribune: “We will not accept that a comma is amended in the text of this agreement.”
Zakaria pointed out that the agreement has been met with rejection by civil political forces since the beginning, adding they are the forces that mainly want to monopolize the transition process.
“Calls to review the peace agreement are inconsistent with the spirit and values of the December revolution,” he stressed.
Possible solutions to overcome the dispute
Nonetheless, Zakaria accepted that any flaws or shortcomings could be remediated through talks.
“Any deficiency in the Juba Agreement can be remedied through annexes, which serve as a window to accommodate any developments or upcoming developments in the agreement. But the revocation of covenants and agreements is the legacy of the dissolved National Congress Party, a culture that we must not cling to, as it only serves to prolong the war,” he said.
Malik Agar, the head of the SPLM-N Revolutionary Front rejected any review of the peace agreement saying those who reject the agreement before its implementation simply seeks to cancel it.
“Those who call for (JPA review) do not know the meaning of war and the suffering of those affected by it,” he reiterated in a statement issued on November 19.
The SPLM-N Agar is part of the FFC coalition like the other groups of the Sudanese Revolutionary Front (SRF) led by Hadi Idris. However, Agar did not take part in a meeting to discuss a draft political declaration the FFC agreed on and proposed to discuss it with NCF and other political groups.
On November 22, the SRF Spokesman Osama Saeed told Sudan Tribune that the SRF held a separate meeting and Agar endorsed the political declaration even if he has some minor observations.
Why review the JPA
Why do the FFC propose a review of the Juba Peace Agreement, and what are the deficiencies or imbalances that became apparent, after two years of its signing, and which they hope to remedy through the review?
Shihab al-Tayeb FFC leading member told Sudan Tribune this agreement did not bring peace in the war-affected areas and the IDPs are still in their camps.
“The agreement did not stop the fighting. Also, it was a cause for new inter-communal conflicts, and there is a number of issues that it did not address. Therefore, we consider there is a need to review this agreement,” al-Tayeb said.
“We believe that peace is a strategic issue, and it is one of the goals of the December revolution, and it must put an end to all fighting,” he added.
For his part, Yasir Arman SPLM-N Revolutionary Democratic Current leader called to review the peace agreement saying “The peace agreement is facing a real crisis because the coup has undermined the political framework, which is the achievement of democratic transformation, as well as the building of a single national army.”
“The current political developments require a review and renewal of the Juba Peace Agreement so that it can receive broad public support,” Arman added.
Repealing the agreement is required to establish a civil state
The Sudanese Communist Party and other allied groups call to drop the peace agreement, which they oppose since its inception, pointing out that the signatory groups do not represent the Darfur people, alluding to the fact that three groups belong to one ethnic group.
“What is required is to cancel this agreement, not to review it. The road to a civil state passes through the overthrow of the coup and the cancellation of the Juba agreement.”Kamal Karar a Member of the Central Committee told Sudan Tribune.
He added that the peace agreement turned into a power-sharing agreement without addressing the root causes of the conflict. He further pointed to the support of the armed groups to the military coup before concluding that the communists had shown their reservations about the hijack of the peace process by the military component from the civil government.
Political bidding
Political analyst Abuzar Ali al-Amin said the armed groups to negotiate the peace agreement adopted several separate geographical paths for every region, adding that this approach meant to protect the share of power and gains of every group.
“Any refusal to review or develop the agreement will be in the name of the real issues of the region. But, this will be merely a (political) bidding. In fact, the real purpose of the rejection will remain mainly to protect the gains made through the power-sharing deal.”
The civilian-led government initially proposed to hold a global peace process gathering all the armed groups because the root causes of the conflicts are the same. But the armed group rejected this approach and called for separate processes saying every region has its specific problems and plights.
(ST)