---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Eric Reeves <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 12:01 AM
Subject: "Khartoum Moves to Strip Citizenship of 'Southern' Sudanese"
To: Eric Reeves <[email protected]>


"Khartoum Moves to Strip Citizenship of 'Southern' Sudanese"

The ENOUGH Project, February 17, 2012

http://enoughproject.org/blogs/khartoum-moves-strip-citizenship-southern-sudanese



   by Eric Reeves



Among the many crises growing more desperate by the day in Sudan, one
has been largely overlooked: On April 8 the Khartoum regime will strip
all "southerners" of their citizenship in the North. No matter that as
many as 1 million people will be denied citizenship solely on the
basis of their ethnicity; no matter that many were born and have lived
all their lives in the North; no matter that these people meet the
traditional international criteria for citizenship, (birth, long
residence, property ownership, even pension rights). The regime in
Khartoum is determined to proceed with what will be nothing less than
an ethnic culling of the population in the North.



Most of these people will find that life without citizenship—with only
vague "residency" permits—to be intolerable. Already subject to
discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, culture, and religion, they
will find that in the new dispensation they are completely excluded.
President al-Bashir has made explicitly clear that cultural, ethnic,
and religious diversity have no place in the North after southern
secession. Even now there has been a marked increase in harassment and
violence against Christian churches and priests; young "southern" men,
identified solely on the basis of their ethnicity, are victims of
press gangs recruiting for militias fighting in Blue Nile and South
Kordofan; discrimination has always been intense, but is rapidly
becoming intolerable.



So what will be the fate of these 700,000 "southerners"? What will be
the consequences of their feeling they must leave their homes in the
North, however debilitating this existence has been? The answer is
that they will attempt to move to South Sudan, a country completely
unfamiliar to a great many. And they will encounter extraordinary
obstacles, beginning with the long and arduous trek by bus or barge.



The International Organization for Migration, or IOM, has declared
that such an undertaking is "impossible," far beyond any available
logistical capacity—and April 8 is only seven weeks away. Moreover,
late March marks the beginning of the rainy season, when many roads
become simply impassible. Those returning are likely to have few of
the resources necessary to resume agricultural livelihoods, and they
will be arriving in a country that is already desperately struggling
with humanitarian crises all along the border regions with the North.
Some 110,000 Dinka Ngok remain displaced from Abyei, mainly in Warrap
state. Tens of thousands have fled the Nuba Mountains in South
Kordofan to South Sudan’s Unity state; many additional tens of
thousands have fled from Blue Nile to Upper Nile state; and many more
tens of thousands have fled to Ethiopia. The U.N. estimates that it
needs $145 million to respond to these populations alone, and this
says nothing about the immense needs within Blue Nile and South
Kordofan, where many hundreds of thousands of people have been
internally displaced or are in desperate need, having come under
bombardment by the government for several months. Khartoum continues
to deny all international humanitarian access to these populations.



Belatedly, the international community is recognizing the full scale
of the broader humanitarian crisis, and particularly the acute food
shortage created by displacement and insecure conditions in the border
regions. Valerie Amos, the U.N.'s chief humanitarian official, very
recently warned "the situation in [South Sudan] as a whole is
extremely precarious, and the risk of a dangerous decline is very
real.” All this is compounded by the deliberate destruction of the
fall harvest of sorghum in both Blue Nile and the Nuba Mountains
(where late spring planting was also disrupted by relentless,
indiscriminate aerial attacks on civilians and their agriculture). The
humanitarian crises in the South are mirrored among displaced
populations in these two northern states.



While the world sees all this as threatening vast human catastrophe,
Khartoum sees only diplomatic or military advantage—an opportunity to
further weaken South Sudan, increasingly with an eye to military
seizure of southern territory in the oil regions. Certainly the regime
is well aware of the consequences of compelling hundreds of thousands
of "southerners" to flee into an already tumultuous, unstable, and
deeply threatening environment. The men who dominate in Khartoum have
long been expert in deliberately creating and exacerbating
humanitarian crises.



This was true during the terrible famine in Bahr el-Ghazal (1998),
during the humanitarian blockade of the Nuba (1990s), and during civil
war in the South, when Khartoum regularly denied air access (and thus
virtually all access) to Operation Lifeline Sudan, which served
millions of people. In Darfur Khartoum has for eight years manipulated
and denied humanitarian relief in immensely destructive fashion. It's
hardly surprising that following the southern self-determination
referendum (January 2011), Khartoum closed many border-crossing areas
to the South, thus halting the movement of food and other items,
contributing to severe food shortages.



By creating such a compressed timeline for compulsory "repatriation,"
Khartoum knows perfectly well this will vastly compound the
humanitarian difficulties in the South. Indeed, this is the reason
that Khartoum has halted the movement of barge traffic on the White
Nile carrying returnees: to prolong their ordeal and desperation on
arrival. Perhaps this deliberate distress inflicted on South Sudan is
meant to create diplomatic leverage in resolving the dispute over oil
revenues, where Khartoum's negotiating brinksmanship has backfired and
compelled the South to shut down all oil production. But exacerbating
humanitarian crises is unlikely to succeed in changing the views of
the southern leadership.



Ominously, the more likely explanation is that this is all to further
weaken the South and make it more vulnerable to military incursions of
the sort we have seen this week at Jau, and in relentless aerial
bombardment of sovereign southern territory. If conflict resumes, it
will be a war of attrition, a war in which humanitarian needs are
simply used as another weapon—and great numbers of civilians will die.
It will, in short, be like all wars waged by this regime.



[Eric Reeves, a professor at Smith College, has published extensively
on Sudan, nationally and internationally, for more than a decade. He
is author of A Long Day's Dying: Critical Moments in the Darfur
Genocide.]


_____________________________
Eric Reeves
Smith College
Northampton, MA 01063

[email protected]
413-585-3326
Skype: ReevesSudan
www.sudanreeves.org
Twitter: @SudanReeves

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob?hl=en.

Reply via email to