UN and AU unwelcomed stand against South Sudan secession

By Justin Ambago Ramba

February 1, 2010 — Though the relationship between the southern and the northern parts of the Sudan is already been scheduled by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), since the year 2005, it seems that some people out there would still want to find some settlements outside this US brokered truce document.

In the last five years, the people of the Sudan have passed through a truly hectic period under the two peace partners of the SPLM and the NCP, largely due to the gross incompatibilities in the expectations and approaches in implementing the agreement.

If the CPA was started up with the main aim of maintaining the unity of the Sudan, however reflecting back on the performance records of the government of national unity (GoNU), coupled with the several dramatic shows put up at the Omdurman based National Assembly, every Sudanese including the international community are left with the solid belief that this illusive unity can no longer be salvaged.

So what is now to replace the long-time slogan of unity at all cost is left to be determined by the outcome of the forth coming referendum.

However there is a vital acknowledgement reached by the Sudanese on both sides of the dividing line and it is that, the Sudan’s so-called ‘Unity ’was in fact an artificial scheme that failed to get any support from the realities on the ground.

The other equally vital acknowledgement is that no any superficial secession can provide the solution to the very complex Sudanese problem, traditionally referred to as the southern problem. It’s from here that those who have rightly concluded that the Sudan can never be kept again as a united entity, are seriously calling for a well negotiated post-2011 arrangement.

Peace can only exist between the south and the north if the international community clearly defines its position and maintains its support for the CPA, by putting pressure on the Sudanese sides to implement the remaining articles in their timely manner.

All those proposals forwarded by the Human Rights Watch, the International Crisis Group, the European Union, and the troika should be sold to both the NCP and the SPLM. The coming phase in the implementation of the CPA should clearly NOT be left for the Sudanese people alone; otherwise a bigger return to war can rightly be expected.

The way forward is to have a lead negotiator similar to what happened in the CPA when we had the Kenyan (Retired Gen) Lazarus Sambayo, who did the lead mediation between the two sides throughout the peace process and ended up in the signing of the 2005 peace agreement.

What should be expected from the US administration, the UK and Norwegian governments, the EU together with the IGAD is that they must accelerate the process of appointing the lead negotiator, and preferable an African for obvious reasons.

This lead negotiator should immediately couple up together with the CPA Assessment and Evaluation Commission and exert pressure on the Sudanese sides to form and endorse the Referendum Commission, which on its turn should start its preparations for the referendum as the time left ahead is now very limited.

Another positive turn of event and can also be taken as a point of reassurance was noted following President Omer al Bashir’s declaration on the 5th anniversary of the CPA celebrations in the southern town of Yambio.

The president in a very rare mood has gone on record when he publicly committed himself in front of all and was picked up by all the local and international media, that he would be the first to recognize the independent state in the south should that be the southerner’s choice in the referendum.

However recently there have been voices coming up from the UN and the AU senior figures that are not well received by the people of south Sudan and the last thing we want at this stage in our history is the loss of trust in the two big organisations.

AU concern about secession

The African Union (AU) Commission Chairman Jean Ping expressed concern that other parts of Sudan beside the South may seek a self determination vote in the future.

“Will the independence of Southern Sudan not lead other players in Darfur and in other places, which are currently not asking for independence, to seek independence as Southern Sudan will have done?” he added.

“We have a feeling that we are sitting on a powder keg,” Ping said.

Though the above grim view is in line with worries of the regional powers with minorities in their own countries that may seek to replicate the Southern Sudanese experience and work for self determination, yet the AU and all those who brokered the CPA must come to understand that any attempt to temper with the referendum in order to favor the unity of the Sudan, will be raising eye brows in south Sudan and may itself be a recipe for war..
We in south Sudan have for very long been made to suffer under the persistent misjudgements of the African organisation since the days of the OAU and now we are hearing similar wordings after the organisation has evolved into the incumbent AU.

Ban Ki-Moon to maintain Sudan’s unity

On January 30, 2010, in Addis Ababa, the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was reported to have said that his organization would work to avoid southern Sudan secession in joint effort with the African Union.

Ban’s remakes are similar to those voiced by the chairman of the African Union (AU) Commission Jean Ping. The bottom line is that both chiefs are sending negative messages typical in disapproval of secession of south Sudan.

While the people of south Sudan appreciate the big role being played by the UN and the AU in maintaining peace in the Sudan, none of us ever expects to hear that the two organizations have lost their neutrality over the issues of unity or secession in the Sudan.

The declared intentions of the UN boss to work hard to avoid a possible secession, reminds us of a similar stand earlier declared by the National Congress Party (NCP) of President al Bashir, when earlier last year they vowed to make secession very difficult if not impossible to be attained by the oppressed people of south Sudan.

The general expectations of the south Sudanese masses are to see a neutral international community that would serve justice and assistance in achieving peace in the Sudan in the run for its first democratic election in decades.

We also expect a neutral and fair role of the AU and the UN in the preparation and conduction of the referendum in 2011 where the southerners are expected to vote either to remain a part of a united Sudan or opt to have their own independent country.

The people of south Sudan have every right at this point in time to be worried about the views expressed by the UN and the African Union chiefs, for these two were only expected to help ensure the elections and the referendums, making sure that they are carried out in a credible and transparent way.

The current impression left by both the UN and AU is that as if they are finding it costly or difficult to work out the post –referendum arrangements, and to some extent it also seems that they are too scared of possible post secession insecurities.

Unfortunately the situation in the Sudan can never be resolved by burying heads in the sand as is known of the two organizations past history in as far as previous African crisis are concerned.

Nobody in Africa today should remain disillusioned by the inherent weakness of both the AU and the UN. Rwanda, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo are clear example where these organizations have shown complete failures.

We in south Sudan still largely remain optimistic because we strongly believe that the US that brokered the CPA and the others like the UK, Norway and the European Union are keen to respect the choice of the people of south Sudan, which is overwhelmingly expected to be in favour of secession come the 2011 referendum.

Dr. Justin Ambago Ramba, M.B, B.Ch, D.R.H, MD. The Secretary General of the United South Sudan Party (USSP) He can be reached at [email protected] or [email protected]