Creating peace in South Sudan requires extraordinary precautions
By Panther Alier
On March 6, 2015, South Sudanese were hit again with grim news, the failure of the government and rebels led by Riek Machar to agree on almost everything that was on negotiation table. I know, the Ethiopian Prime Minister felt humiliated and disrespected by the action of the South Sudanese leaders. But he must also know he has himself and the IGAD authorities to blame. It is a fact, in monitoring and evaluation, you can’t set indicators that are unattainable. With all hosts of conditions by both parties on the table, it was purely over exaggeration to think that peace was imminent.
In fact, for many South Sudanese, the reality of the negotiations hitting a bed-rock had already sunk in. Clearly, the conflict was already transformed and other interests had taken hold. The process of this 15 months’ conflict in South Sudan has taught us something. Many interest groups have manifested unusual and unhelpful signs. The first unusual sign was the formation of the commission of inquiry by the African Union to investigate crimes committed during conflict during the December 15, 2013 crisis. I find this move unusual because it started investigating crimes that were still being committed. It is like sending investigators to investigate a fire that was still burning down a house or a forest before putting off the fire. And since this involved lives of human beings, one would have hope for peace first and crimes investigations later.
The second unusual sign is the nature in which the peace negotiations are being held. Negotiations are process to which an agreement can only be hoped for. Conventionally, conflicting parties need to have some satisfactions over their negotiated results. If you are going to negotiate a peace agreement, you must know that any bit of coercion will not work. In the case of South Sudan, yes, lives are being lost. But the utmost priority is to negotiate a peace that will be sustainable so more lives will not be lost in future. So, here is what the IGAD team failed to predict. Setting deadlines for peace agreement was in itself a grave mistake. It undermined the integrity of the process. And this takes me to the rest of unusual sign in my list.
The third sign is how all the countries involved in the peace process had their own interest in South Sudan. Others such Uganda and Sudan have their positions clear. Others are still hiding theirs, but we, South Sudan, see them clearly. In fact, others within the South Sudanese community questions impartiality of Ethiopian government when it has clearly allowed its northern region (Gambella) to be used as a launching pad by the rebels. You would think for someone to stand on a moral ground and be accepted as a genuine mediator, he would need to come out clearly to demonstrate that by all means. Or, maybe the Ethiopian think the South Sudanese are “stupid” to realize this high level of disingenuous.
The fourth and final unusual sign is the change of attitude by western countries toward South Sudan. Their lack of confidence in the current president is bringing down so fast the country with him. Their justified bitterness for lack of development and progress in the country is understandable. But, one thing the West has not yet understood is that you cannot easily do away with these guys in leadership right now. They fought the civil war with the Sudan – they rightly feel entitled. It will take time for them to be paced out. By the way, even the now so perceived “good guys” were colleagues in government and actively played destructive roles in the management of the country’s resources and development. They are just more wolves in sheep skins.
Now that the deadline for the agreement has passed and the mediators are back to the drawing board and strategizing for next course of action, I want to add a voice of South Sudanese. South Sudan has quality of high unpredictability. Any resolution to solve this active conflict will require extra-ordinary precautions. For example, the current rebel fighters are 99.995% men from Nuer ethnic group. Creating a separate army would mean an army of one tribe versus the rest (63 tribes) – if this does not set a bad precedence for South Sudan, I don’t know what else. The other area of sensitivity is the proposed leadership structure. We all heard the just failed agreement was an agreement to bring back both opposition and government in a power sharing mechanism. This would see the current vice president hosted in order to give back his seat to Dr. Riek or so it seems. This is already a problem. Unless the stereotype among South Sudanese that Equatorian are not good fighter is true, this will create another rebellion by the people of Greater Equatoria in the country. Because there will be no other justification other than the price of taking up rebellion, that Dr. Riek is able to claim back his vice presidency. But, when both groups are back at the realm of power, the real ethical questions with this approach are; what will stop them from fighting each other again? Who will hold them accountable for the atrocious crimes committed?
This is why all those countries/individuals outside there that are genuinely looking for ways to help bring peace to South Sudan need to be proactive in listening and learning about South Sudanese. I say ‘genuine’ because there are indicators of impartiality already shown by many countries. And this is the reason I was worried when I heard the TROIKA countries meeting in Sudan to discuss the recent failed South Sudan peace talk in Addis Ababa. Interestingly, in the recent leaked AU commission of inquiry document, there was apparent regret for the independence of South Sudan. At the same time, United States’ government all of a sudden made friends with Khartoum and invited rather controversial figures to visit Washington, DC. Right now, the US government and its allies are working to impose an arms embargo on South Sudan. This will just weakened the already fragile state and will make it vulnerable to increasingly becoming powerful Sudan. All these beg a question, is the world going to underestimate South Sudanese and make a terrible mistake again by supporting the Sudan invades the South? Or, maybe I am really pulling a cart before the horse! I hope someone is intelligent enough to know Sudan has its own domestic problems to add on another major problem. My final advice to those involve in solving problem of South Sudan is that South Sudanese are unpredictable. And it is a natural norm that unpredictable situations require extraordinary precautions.
The author can be reached at [email protected]