Unity support fund projects for South Sudan

By Jacob K. Lupai

July 10, 2010 — It seems Northern Sudan has run out of any concrete action but not yet of ideas to make unity of Sudan attractive. Naturally the North won’t run out of ideas because it is very keen on unity with the South which is anyway adamantly reluctant for obvious reasons. Lately the North has come up with ideas it conceives as a grand plan of unity support fund projects to make unity attractive. The projects are of construction of roads, railways, electricity and education. The approach is a series of highly repeated pronouncements of projects under the created unity support fund to convince the South to vote for unity in the forthcoming referendum in January 2011.

It is not difficult to understand why in the last minute the North is in frenzy over unity. Over the years the North, which has always been suspicious of the South breaking away, has never considered development in the South a top priority. The North then did not care to make unity attractive through development but through the brute force of arms. The sudden panicky reaction as a genuine interest in development of the South is simply because it has become apparent to the North that the South has reached a point of no return but to break away from the North. The highly pronounced projects under the unity support fund are nothing but a consolation for a miserable failure in the development of the South compared to the North. If it is not also a deception it is difficult to know what it is.

The North has plenty of time and resources at its disposal to waste in a futile attempt to convince the South to favour unity over separation. For the last half a century since independence the South has been made to occupy second class position since Sudan was declared an Arab Islamic country. It will be seen that voting in the referendum for unity with the North under Arab Islamic status of Sudan is something unthinkable for the predominantly non Arab South. The experience of 54 years of independence of Sudan has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that the North and the South couldn’t be a united country. The implementation of the Addis Ababa Agreement of 1972 and the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2005 has proven that the North and the South could be better off as two independent nations. Unity under Islamic Sharia and unity of Sudan as an Arab country is never going to appeal to the non Arab South. We do not need a rocket scientist to convince the South of the advantage of unity under a united Arab Islamic Sudan.

The South has had an expensive experiment with a unitary system for the last 54 years in which the result has only been an utter and bitter disappointment. At the mention of unity of Sudan fresh tears of anguish still flow down the cheeks as people are reminded of the enormous destruction of lives and property the North did to the South in the name of unity. This is not to spread hatred between the North and the South but this has been the reality of unity of Sudan as the imposed programme of Arabisation and Islamisation had done before the CPA. A holy war (jihad) was declared on the South by the very leaders that are now trying to convince the South to vote for unity. Anyway the South has had enough of unity that was characterized by gross marginalization.

Even if the North has all the resources at its disposal to employ there is no way the South will be convinced of unity with the North. Some evidence is that on Friday 9 July there was a huge procession organized in the South by the Youth for Separation. In Juba the procession started from Juba Stadium to Dr John Garang de Mabior Mausoleum and the procession was joined by people of all walks of life. Processions for separation also took place in Bor, Malakal, Rumbek, Wau and Yambio. This seems to show clear evidence that unity of Sudan may not stand a chance. It is most likely that the South may separate to become a nation among the free nations of the world.

It is time for the North to come to terms with the imminent separation and independence of the South. It seems no amount of persuasion will swing the South to unity. As said above the South has reached a point of no return. There is only one way and that is separation and independence. The unity support fund projects that are now being pronounced to make unity attractive may not help. We are now left with about five months to the referendum. When will the projects be implemented and how will they make any difference to the lives of the people in the South before the referendum. It will also be difficult to make an impact assessment of the projects in such a short time and moreover most of the projects are still plans on paper. So the said projects may be a deception.

North-South relations may dramatically improve if the North accepts the inevitable that the South may soon be an independent neighbour. No region in Sub Saharan Africa has suffered the way the South has under the heavy yoke of the North in the name of unity. It may be time for the North to say sorry as a good will gesture in the effort to promote mutual understanding and respect. As would-be independent neighbours it is important that bridges of cooperation are built. An independent South will be an important trading partner of the North. Both the North and the South have a stake in making cordial relations for mutual advantage in trade. As two independent nations the North and the South will need to cooperate in serving their best common interest in a competitive world.

The North definitely won’t be scared of an independent South as a neighbour. It is known that the fear of the unknown causes anxiety. One fear is that with the separation of the South, Sudan may disintegrate completely. Another is that separation of the South may destabilise the region. Those may be legitimate fears but they should not only remain as fears. They should be addressed. The world has recognized the legitimate right of the South to self-determination through the CPA. This means that the South has the right to choose either separation or unity. Either choice should be respected or provisions made to address problems arising. However, an independent South will not be an enemy state to the North. It will be a partner in so many ways. There are blood relations between the people of the North and the South. People have also lived together for a long time that there may be strong bond of friendships. This may be a paradox that why then should the South separate from the North. Well, when two brothers disagree and go separate ways does that mean the two are no longer brothers? Each one may need a space and given that space brotherly relations may be restored. The South obviously needs a space after a lot of disagreements with the North and after that there may not be a cause for tensions.

In conclusion northern and southern leaders should now start to work out modalities for a peaceful co-existence whether it is separation or unity. It is a delight that they are now starting. Relations between the North and the South in post referendum era should be exemplary to the world. We do not need the kind of tensions between North and South Korea to happen here between North and South Sudan after the referendum in January 2011. We should learn to resolve issues through dialogue but not through the barrel of the gun.

The author can be reached at [email protected]