Daily Beast Op-ed: Government Ceasefire Is First Step Towards Peace in
South Sudan
Posted by Enough Team <http://www.enoughproject.org/blogs/enough-team> on
Jan 24, 2014


*Editor's Note: This op-ed co-authored by John Prendergast and Akshaya
Kumar originally appeared on The Daily Beast.
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/24/government-ceasefire-is-first-step-towards-peace-in-south-sudan.html>*

The government and the armed opposition have signed a ceasefire, in a
hopeful step after weeks of bloody fighting.

After holding their people hostage in a truly Machiavellian power struggle
that has dragged on for weeks, South Sudan's leaders have finally taken a
step towards peace. On Thursday, delegates representing the government
signed a cessation of hostilities agreement with the armed opposition.

The agreement, which comes into effect today, promises that both sides'
combatant forces will stop all military activities aimed at one another and
freeze their forces in the places they are in. South Sudan's government has
been engaged in a territorial struggle against an armed rebellion for
weeks. If respected, the new commitment to a cessation of hostilities
should end that and bring a degree of calm back to the embattled country.

While a significant milestone, this commitment is not the end of the peace
process for South Sudan. In fact, it is just the beginning.

In the six weeks since fighting broke out in South Sudan's capital city,
almost half a million people have fled their homes in fear, thousands have
died and countless reports of human rights abuses and war crimes have
emerged.

In the six weeks since fighting broke out in South Sudan's capital city,
almost half a million people have fled their homes in fear, thousands have
died and countless reports of human rights abuses and war crimes have
emerged. Our Satellite Sentinel Project has secured imagery showing
hundreds of burned homes and razed villages across the country. In one
town, we were able to count over three thousand destroyed structures.

South Sudanese will have to confront these abuses, combat impunity and
broker reconciliation between increasingly divided constituencies. This can
only happen through an inclusive and broadly consultative national dialogue
process complemented by an internationally backed human rights
documentation effort.

At its heart, the events of the past six weeks are the product of a
long-simmering contest for control of the country's ruling party, the Sudan
People Liberation Movement, or SPLM. Despite fledgling efforts to
professionalize the national army, build the capacity of government
institutions and empower dissenting voices, the SPLM still has the last
word on most things in South Sudan.

*Read the full op-ed on The Daily Beast.
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/24/government-ceasefire-is-first-step-towards-peace-in-south-sudan.html>*


Government Ceasefire Is First Step Towards Peace in South Sudan
The government and the armed opposition have signed a ceasefire, in a
hopeful step after weeks of bloody fighting.

After holding their people hostage in a truly Machiavellian power struggle
that has dragged on for weeks, South Sudan's leaders have finally taken a
step towards peace. On Thursday, delegates representing the government
signed a cessation of hostilities agreement with the armed opposition.

The agreement, which comes into effect today, promises that both sides'
combatant forces will stop all military activities aimed at one another and
freeze their forces in the places they are in. South Sudan's government has
been engaged in a territorial struggle against an armed rebellion for
weeks. If respected, the new commitment to a cessation of hostilities
should end that and bring a degree of calm back to the embattled country.

While a significant milestone, this commitment is not the end of the peace
process for South Sudan. In fact, it is just the beginning.

In the six weeks since fighting broke out in South Sudan's capital city,
almost half a million people have fled their homes in fear, thousands have
died and countless reports of human rights abuses and war crimes have
emerged.

In the six weeks since fighting broke out in South Sudan's capital city,
almost half a million people have fled their homes in fear, thousands have
died and countless reports of human rights abuses and war crimes have
emerged. Our Satellite Sentinel Project has secured imagery showing
hundreds of burned homes and razed villages across the country. In one
town, we were able to count over three thousand destroyed structures.

South Sudanese will have to confront these abuses, combat impunity and
broker reconciliation between increasingly divided constituencies. This can
only happen through an inclusive and broadly consultative national dialogue
process complemented by an internationally backed human rights
documentation effort.

At its heart, the events of the past six weeks are the product of a
long-simmering contest for control of the country's ruling party, the Sudan
People Liberation Movement, or SPLM. Despite fledgling efforts to
professionalize the national army, build the capacity of government
institutions and empower dissenting voices, the SPLM still has the last
word on most things in South Sudan.

Since the party is the be all and end all in the country, there was no
safety valve when tensions between President Salva Kiir and his erstwhile
deputy Riek Machar heated up. When pressure mounted, the political struggle
mutated into an ugly violent conflict that quickly found expression in
attacks on neighboring ethnic communities. In South Sudan, the easiest way
to mobilize constituencies is to stoke the flames of ethnic tensions. As a
result, ethnic targeting and reprisals have been happening for weeks now.
It is unclear if this week's cessation of hostilities will be able to put
that genie back in the bottle.

What is clear is that a vocal commitment to enforcing this new agreement is
necessary. That means holding all sides accountable to violations of the
terms of the agreement and raising the specter of targeted sanctions and
other forms of accountability against those who block peace by continuing
military operations.

But this will not be enough. South Sudan needs a real political process to
get back on track. This will require power diplomacy in Addis Ababa and the
region. U.S. Special Envoy Don Booth and other senior U.S. diplomats can
help build the political will necessary to push both sides to make
difficult compromises. As in the negotiations leading up to the 2005
Comprehensive Peace Agreement, the U.S. and other interested countries need
to be deeply engaged.  They must collectively push for a strong commitment
to channeling civil society voices into the process. While outsiders can
provide technical support, only South Sudanese will have the answers on the
way forward.

At this complicated moment, beware of the danger of a single narrative in
South Sudan. Many point to the country's rich oil wealth and lament the
resource curse as the root cause of the instability. Others highlight the
failure to manage South Sudan's rich diversity as the crux of the problem,
noting a long history of tensions between the country's two main ethnic
groups and centuries of tit-for-tat cattle raids. Some see lingering anger
about Riek Machar's central role in a brutal massacre of Dinka in 1991 as a
key driving factor behind the violence. In contrast, other observers stress
the state security forces' attacks on members of the Nuer community in Juba
in mid-December as the real galvanizing factor. Still others are convinced
that South Sudan's allies are to blame. Numerous columnists have argued
that the U.S. government and key non-governmental actors were too enamored
by their own narratives about South Sudan to see things falling apart. This
easy critique belies the agency of South Sudanese.

Many outsiders indeed strongly supported the right of self-determination
for South Sudanese. Had there been no referendum, the North-South war would
have continued with even greater ferocity. So when given the chance to vote
on the question, an almost unanimous 99 percent chose independence from a
government in the north in 2011. Very few in South Sudan regret that
decision. After suffering systematic marginalization and 38 combined years
of civil war since Sudan’s independence from Great Britain in 1956, South
Sudanese were ready for self-governance. This latest bout of violence is no
reason to question the country's very existence.

No one expected the first few years of independence to be smooth. Indeed
they were not. Civil society groups justifiably worried about the interim
constitution's clear consolidation of power in the hands of the executive.
The government has been plagued by endemic corruption and was forced to
seek high-interest oil-backed loans to keep the government afloat after
unilaterally shutting down oil production in a dispute with neighboring
Sudan. More disturbing, rampant reports of human rights abuses by state
security forces went largely ignored, although the army did conduct limited
prosecutions. But these failures are no reason to abandon South Sudan's
people.

President Obama reassured South Sudanese that "those working for a more
peaceful, democratic, unified country will continue to have a steady
partner in the United States of America." These words are important, but
they must be accompanied by further actions. Through an enhanced diplomatic
presence, apolitical technical assistance to the mediation process, a
commitment to empowering South Sudanese civil society involvement and a
push for genuine accountability, the U.S. government once again has a real
opportunity to make an impact on South Sudan's future.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14oqVOpp%2BMCNrzHNnYDM1M7r1ZvoS7YYqSNgdorA%2BPEui1Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to