---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John Ashworth <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM
Subject: [sudan-john-ashworth] Implications of South Sudan Conflict for
Sudan
To: Group <[email protected]>


The Implications of the South Sudan Conflict for Sudan

Sudan Democracy First Group - 03/02/14

The conflict that broke out in South Sudan on 15 December, 2013,
between factions of the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army
(SPLM/A) has made for strange bed-fellows. President Omar Bashir has
pledged support to the elected government of President Salva Kiir
against former Vice President Riek Machar, the man who fought the SPLA
on Khartoum's side during a significant part of the twenty-year civil
war. The primary reason for this is the dire need of both Presidents
to maintain oil production in order to bankroll their political
positions. With Ugandan President Museveni sending troops to lend a
fighting hand to the southern army, Sudan and Uganda's often divergent
regional agendas converged. On the other hand, the administration of
US President Obama sent barely veiled threats of crippling sanctions
to discourage Machar from carrying through with his threat to take
Juba by force. Ironically, while continuing the heavy summer offensive
against the Sudan Revolutionary Forces (SRF), President Bashir has
been able to position himself as a force for peace and stability. Yet
the focus on the South has taken the pressure off any progress on
either the implementation of the September 2012 Agreements or the
talks with the SPLM-N under the auspices of the AU's High
Implementation Panel (AUHIP).

Just as the return of war in South Kordofan and Blue Nile in 2011, and
the continued violence in Darfur and popular protests across Sudan's
cities in September illustrate the shortcomings of the 2005
Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), so does the recent crisis in
South Sudan reflect the failure to address key issues related to
governance, democracy, reconciliation and justice in the new Republic
of South Sudan. The parties and the international community now face
the same challenges in the South as in Sudan: to support an elite,
exclusionary, and short-term peace deal which will take us back to the
status quo, or be bold and push for a principled and inclusive
process, which is accountable to the wider population and seeks to
address the root causes of conflict. Khartoum's interest revolves
around ensuring the conflict has minimal effect on the Sudanese
economy, as the NCP's survival is based on the economic stability of
the country.

Implication on Khartoum

President Bashir's visit to Juba on 6 January, accompanied by the
Defence, Foreign and Oil Ministers, was a gesture of support to the
Kiir government. "We come so that we can bring peace to South Sudan,
to our brothers and sisters in South Sudan. Our relationship is very
important," Bashir was quoted as saying. Support so far has been
political and symbolic, not military, despite the declaration that
rebel forces would not be allowed to operate from within Sudan's
borders and the offer of joint patrols of the oil fields which was
later denied. This is despite the historic ties between Machar and
Khartoum during the 1990s. The ongoing economic crisis in Sudan has
political implications, as showcased during the protests in September
2013 and the need to maintain the patronage system, in particular
among the security services. For Khartoum, as long as the oil
continues to flow, and its transit and refining fees are not
threatened, it will have little interest in being involved militarily.
The crisis in the South has allowed el-Bashir to position himself to
the international community as a necessary stabilizing force and a
peacemaker. UK Minister for Africa, Mark Simmonds, was quoted in media
reports commending the role of Sudan in the conflict.  It also takes
pressure off Bashir to deliver progress with the SPLM-N talks under
the AUHIP and on humanitarian access to the Two Areas.

According to the Human Security Baseline Assessment (HSBA), violence
erupted on 19 December in Unity state, affecting the Greater Pioneer
Operating Company base and later the Thar Jath oilfield and other oil
fields near Leer. Fighting continued to Bentiu and other areas of
Unity State on 20 December. Workers from the oilfields, including the
China National Petroleum Corporation and India's Oil and Natural Gas
Corporation, were evacuated. According to HSBA, all production in
Unity has ceased, with at least 4 facilities undergoing emergency
shutdowns, amounting to the suspension of a fifth of South Sudan's
245,000 barrels a day. According to the IMF, transit fees will be
worth approximately $1.4 billion to Sudan in 2014. Fighting has also
affected oil fields and production in Upper Nile. Furthermore, Sudan
is interested in ensuring South Sudan will be able to pay the
estimated $3.2 billion as part of the compensation package agreed to
in September 2012. In the longer term, the Government of Sudan needs
good relations with the South in order to help secure international
debt relief, which totals over $40 billion.

Implication on the Armed Groups

On 28 December, forces allied with former Vice President Riek Machar
accused the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) of supporting the
government of South Sudan. The JEM has publically denied this, saying
it would not engage in the conflict. There has been no evidence to
date that the SPLM-N has engaged in the fighting or has taken a
political side. However, clearly the SRF leadership, and in particular
the SPLM-N, have connections with both the Kiir and Machar camps.
Nevertheless, the conflict in the South poses a dilemma for the
alliance. Every day the conflict continues puts pressures on the SRF
constituent movements to join one side or the other. The still
un-demarcated border is very porous and the presence of SRF forces in
South Sudan has been known for some time. The conflict will therefore
affect supply lines and rear-operating bases, and if the conflict in
the South brings Kiir and Bashir closer, this could create a new
situation for the SRF.

Humanitarian Implications

More immediately, the conflict in the South has a direct impact on the
over 200,000 Sudanese refugees in South Sudan in addition to southern
civilians caught in the crossfire. Entire communities are bearing the
brunt of the hostilities between belligerents in the dry season
campaign in Blue Nile and South Kordofan states. IDPs and refugees in
the transitional zone between the two countries are trapped; they
cannot seek refuge on the other side of the border where serious
fighting is underway.  Fighting in Unity spread to Pariang on December
20th, very close to the Yida refugee camp and other refugee sites. Not
only has the threat of direct violence increased, in particular given
the fighting in Unity and proximity of Yida to Jau and Pariang, but
international aid workers were evacuated on 22 December and pipe lines
to the camps severely disrupted. According to aid agencies, since the
start of the fighting in Unity up to 1,850 people have crossed into
South Kordofan, including refugees returning to the conflict-affected
areas in South Kordofan, and 2,000 have moved into the Abyei area.

Implications for regional and international dynamics:

The flurry of international concern and attention on the crisis in the
South has pushed the crisis in Sudan into the background. This
includes not only the implementation of the Matrix for the September
Agreements. The military involvement of Uganda, approved by its
Parliament has given the conflict a dangerous regional dynamic and
risks undermining the mediation efforts of the Intergovernmental
Authority for Development (IGAD) of which Uganda is member. At
present, the focus of the international community's efforts, including
the presence of diplomats from China, the US, and the EU's Special
Envoys in addition to the IGAD and African Union, is barely sustaining
the cessation of hostilities agreement, as the violence continues.
However, the negotiators are focusing exclusively on engagement with
the belligerents to resolve the political issues that triggered the
conflict in the first place. However, in a perfect mirror of the
crisis in Sudan, the regional mediators and international community
backers and the parties face the challenge of moving beyond striking a
narrow deal between the armed actors, focussed on a cessation of
hostilities and a short-term power-sharing agreement.  South Sudanese
and international voices are already raising concerns over how the
Addis negotiations can move beyond short-term crisis management and
create mechanisms to address the root causes of the conflict,
including issues of governance, democratization, corruption, justice,
accountability and reconciliation. Most worryingly, the talks in Addis
continue to reproduce the worst historic trend of Sudanese
negotiations: they only include the armed actors, and South Sudanese
society has a very little role, other than to suffer the consequences
of the violence and their so called leader's political aspirations.

END
______________________
John Ashworth

Sudan, South Sudan Advisor

[email protected]

+254 725 926 297 (Kenya mobile)
+211 919 695 362 (South Sudan mobile)
+27 79 832 8834 (South Africa mobile)
+44 750 304 1790 (UK/international)
+88 216 4334 0735 (Thuraya satphone)

PO Box 52662 - 00100, Nairobi, Kenya

This is a personal e-mail address and the contents do not necessarily
reflect the views of any organisation

--
--
The content of this message does not necessarily reflect John Ashworth's
views. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, John Ashworth is not the author
of the content and the source is always cited.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sudan-john-ashworth" 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.co.za/group/sudan-john-ashworth
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sudans-john-ashworth" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

-- 
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].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14opwjzGycFvRQHPGDpHbB%2BMFrtC%3D5ZHmjRAQ%3DOK0WSXq9g%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to