S Sudan: Real talks will only begin once fighting stops
Cutting off the supply of arms could help increase the chances of a
ceasefire holding.
Last updated: 03 May 2014 12:04
<
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/profile/james-copnall.html> James
Copnall
The negotiations between the South Sudanese government and rebels began
again this week after a short pause for consultations. During the three week
adjournment, the fighting, if anything, escalated. Dozens of civilians who
had sought shelter at a United Nations base in Bor were
<
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article50690> killed by a mob which
briefly overpowered the peacekeepers, trainee soldiers were shot in Mapel,
though just how many is
<
https://radiotamazuj.org/en/article/governor-strongly-denies-mapel-massacre
-claims> disputed, and perhaps most serious of all, the rebels who over-ran
the town of Bentiu are accused of a
<
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/04/us-condemns-s-sudan-massacre-a
s-abomination-201442345238891721.html> massacre in which hundreds of
civilians were killed.
All these events and other clashes which received less media coverage,
expose how little the peace talks have been able to achieve so far. Although
both sides signed a cessation of hostilities
<
http://reliefweb.int/report/south-sudan-republic/south-sudanese-parties-sig
n-agreements-cessation-hostilities-and> agreement in January, just three
weeks after the talks began, this has not been respected. Both military
commands regularly state that they do no more than defend themselves when
they are attacked, but in fact both sides have launched offensives in the
last three months. In particular, two major towns, Bentiu and Malakal, have
been fought over and the rebels have made no secret of their intention to
target the nearby
<
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/04/s-sudan-rebels-say-closing-oil
-fields-201442492653667575.html> oilfields.
All this comes at a harrowing individual cost, and the ongoing violence is
tearing apart South Sudan's cohesion as a nation. South Sudanese post
disturbing images of those who have apparently been killed on social media
every day (though some are clearly photos recycled from conflicts elsewhere
on the continent). The gruesome photos are accompanied by invective
accusations. On the battlefield, all too often this growing hostility is
expressed through human rights violations, including against civilians. In
Bor and Bentiu, to take just two examples, non-combatants were not just
killed but actively targeted, including on ethnic lines. Restoring trust is
all but impossible while the massacres continue.
The piles of bodies are not the only consequence of the fighting. More than
a million people have
<
http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/South_Sudan_crisis
_sitrep_33_as_of_25_April_2014.pdf> fled the war, and most of them are out
of reach of much help. Already markets in some areas are running low on food
and farmers have not been able to plant their fields. Aid agencies are
warning that up to 7 million people, which is 70 percent of the population,
could be at risk of
<
http://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressrelease/2014-04-22/south-sudan-warni
ng-respond-humanitarian-crisis-now-or-face-larger-catastrophe> severe food
insecurity in the coming year. There are fears that the fighting could
provoke a famine.
How bad can things get?
There is clearly growing international concern about just how
<
http://www.voanews.com/content/kenyan-president-says-he-will-not-allow-geno
cide-in-south-sudan/1901837.html> bad things could get in South Sudan. This
needs to be transmitted, as forcefully as possible, to the government and
rebel negotiating teams convened in Addis Ababa. Up until now, the
impression that neither side is in a particular rush to stop the conflict,
let alone solve the underlying issues, has proved impossible to shake off
The final shape the negotiations should take has been hotly debated. The 11
politicians who were accused of playing a role in the alleged attempted coup
at the beginning of this crisis, but who were subsequently released, wish to
present a political alternative to the government and the rebels. Many of
them are likely to articulate strong criticisms of President Salva Kiir's
governance, while denouncing taking up arms to make that point. In this,
there is clearly a degree of political opportunism, particularly given the
idea floated by some South Sudanese and foreigners that an interim
government involving neither Kiir or the rebel leader Riek Machar should be
set up.
Neither leader, of course, is likely to accept this proposition. The 11 men
are not the only would-be participants in the talks. South Sudanese civil
society organisations have expressed their desire to be included, to
represent the view of those outside the political and military elites which
are fighting over the country's future and their
<
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article50316> role in it. For the
moment, though, the talks are restricted to the warring parties.
The focus must now be on convincing, or if necessary forcing, the men with
guns to adopt a real ceasefire, which holds. The United States and the
United Nations have threatened targeted
<
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/04/24/uk-southsudan-university-sanctions
-idUKBREA3N03O20140424> sanctions on those who block peace. It is surely no
coincidence that just hours after the UN's announcement, the South Sudanese
justice minister announced that charges against the four remaining
"political detainees", Pagan Amum, Oyai Deng, Majak D'Agoot and Ezekiel Lol,
had been stayed in the interests of peace, allowing for the men to be
released. This had been a key international demand. The US and the UN should
be prepared to actually impose sanctions if this round of talks in Addis
Ababa does not halt the war.
However, this would only work if everybody, and in particular South Sudan's
neighbours, agree to implement them. US Secretary of State John Kerry has
repeatedly spent part of his visit to Ethiopia trying to
<
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-01/kerry-arrives-in-ethiopia-with-age
nda-heavy-on-security-peace.html> persuade the region to impose sanctions on
leaders from both the government and the rebels.
A robust peacekeeping force
One reason the fighting hasn't stopped is because a monitoring and
verification mechanism created by the IGAD, the regional body, hasn't been
properly deployed. A regional military force is also expected to be sent
into South Sudan to keep the peace. IGAD says its special envoys have been
seeking
<
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5FAwdVtt-gCWFFac2dfbUdiWFZqdGx2cFotRVJPYkY
0UnI0/edit?pli=1> support for both initiatives.
A robust peacekeeping force is problematic. One IGAD member, Uganda, is
already involved in the fighting in South Sudan, sending in troops to back
up Kiir. The South Sudanese rebels will not consider Ugandan troops as
neutral. Regional peacekeepers under an IGAD mandate may be accused of
furthering their own country's political and economic interests within South
Sudan. Normally, it would seem logical to bolster the strength and mandate
of the already existing UN peacekeeping mission, UNMISS. However, the South
Sudanese government's dismal
<
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-25826598> relationship with UNMISS
means it would be likely to reject this notion. Somehow, though, a solution
must be found.
Sending in enough troops to stop a war in such a large country, which
presents many geographical challenges, will always be difficult. Yet getting
the rebels and the government to pause their deadly embrace is a
precondition for making meaningful progress at the talks. At the very least,
it ought to be possible to send in enough military observers, backed up by
peacekeepers, to apportion blame if further military offensives are
launched. This could trigger a range of sanctions on individuals. Another
profitable avenue to explore could be arms flows. Both sides seem to have
enough ammunition to keep fighting, but this will not last forever. Cutting
off the supply could help increase the chances of a ceasefire holding.
James Copnall is the author of "A Poisonous Thorn in our Hearts" about Sudan
and South Sudan after the 2011 split. He was the BBC correspondent for both
countries from 2009-12. Before this he was based in Ivory Coast (2004-7) and
Morocco (2008-9).
Received on Sat May 03 2014 - 16:33:25 EDT