SPLM, NCP at crossroads over North South border issue – ICG

September 4, 2010 (JUBA) — Failure by key political actors clearly define Sudan’s north-south boundary lines not only hindered the full implementation of 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), but also fueled mistrust between the two signatory parties, International Crisis Group (ICG) said in its latest policy briefing.

The CPA, signed between the Khartoum-based National Congress Party (NCP) and the south dominant Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) ended over two decades of a bloody civil war, which the UN estimates to have claimed 2 million lives.

The 24-paged document, entitled, “Sudan: Defining the North-South Border”, says “the North and South must take political action to define their mutual boundary if they hope to avoid future complications, including a return to conflict.”

To-date, says ICG, the Sudan’s disputed North-Sudan boundary remains “dangerously militarized” because the country’s oil resources are concentrated in these areas.

According to the briefing, demarcation of this border was expected to have been completed six months after the signing of the CPA signing, but remains unresolved five years later.

“A solution to the border is not only about drawing a line, but about defining the nature and management of that border and the future relations of communities on both sides”, Zach Vertin, ICG’s Horn of Africa Analyst says, adding that, “Completing these two tasks would go a long way toward preventing the border from becoming a source of renewed conflict in the post-CPA era”.

With the referendum on self-determination just months away, the ICG briefing appeals to both the NCP and SPLM devise effective mechanisms that will address the post-referendum era.

For instance, it urges to two parties to, “Agree on a broad framework for cross-border arrangements, one that addresses citizenship, cross-border movement and seasonal migration, economic activity and security”.

“Progress toward a mutually-beneficial package may lessen the potential impact of where exactly the disputed boundary is drawn in the end”, Vertin further notes.

The technocrats involved in the boundary demarcation, further says the 24-paged document, needed to take into consideration views from local actors, especially in relation to their role in defining future border management and trans-border relations.

“A framework should allow space for local agreements, and the NCP and SPLM should establish a channel through which border communities can feed directly in to the negotiations on cross-border arrangements”, it says.

Meanwhile, ICG calls upon Sudan’s two dominant parties to liaise with the UN and international partners and identity an agency to implement the demarcation, agree to UN participation in that process, and act upon renewed commitments to resume demarcation in the undisputed areas.

This approach, it says, should involve sensitizing the communities on the implications of the north-south border demarcation, designing one or more complementary border-monitoring mechanisms to support a soft and stable boundary, ensure the rights and responsibilities of border populations, and possibly monitor population movements and new security arrangements.

(ST)