Power sharing is not solution to South Sudan conflict
Article
Comments (0)
email Email
print Print
pdfSave
separation
increase
decrease
separation
separation
facebook
myspace
twitter
buzzyahoo
By Jacob K. Lupai
South Sudan is engulfed in a conflict that seems to have defied all
attempts to resolve it peacefully. The conflict is now about 18 months
old and despite every effort made to try to end it, South Sudanese are
still to enjoy peace and stability after having shed millions of
liters of their own precious blood to achieve independence from
vicious colonizers.
The conflict has now become the concern of Africa in particular and
the international community at large to chart a better way forward for
South Sudan to realize peace and stability through whatever means
possible.
It is evident that South Sudanese on their own have no power to end
the conflict because they find it easier to disagree than agree. For
example, an agreement on cessation of hostilities is easily dishonored
with either side to the conflict vehemently blaming each other. The
blame game continues monotonously while the country bleeds
senselessly.
South Sudan conflict
The conflict in South Sudan began on 15 December 2013. However,
according to South Sudan Human Rights Commission (SSHRC) Interim
Report on South Sudan Internal Conflict December 15, 2013 – March 15,
2014, the genesis of the conflict can be traced back to July 2013 when
President Salva Kiir Mayardit made a major reshuffle, dropping his
Vice President, Dr Riek Machar from the Cabinet.
The reshuffle in July 2013 heightened political rivalries and tensions
within the ruling party, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement
(SPLM). Prior to the reshuffle Dr Riek Machar as the Vice President
and also deputy to President Salva Kiir Mayardit in the SPLM, openly
expressed his desire to challenge the President for the leadership of
the SPLM and therefore the President’s leadership as the Head of
State.
The political rivalry between President Salva Kiir Mayardit and his
former Vice President Dr Riek Machar for power and the leadership of
the SPLM, and therefore the Head of State, is the cause of the
conflict. A paper presented by SSHRC (July 2014) confirms that the
cause of the current conflict is the struggle for the leadership and
direction of the affairs of the SPLM and therefore the leadership of
the country.
The start of the conflict was blamed on the alleged attempted coup to
overthrow the government. However, others also claimed that there was
no coup attempt but a fabricated one to silence critics. Nevertheless,
whether there was a coup attempt or not what the people of South Sudan
need right now is peace, stability and development to improve the
quality of their lives. In addition, insecurity is so rampant that the
very existence of South Sudan as a sovereign country may be under
threat of disintegration.
Institutional reforms
In the absence of meaningful institutional reforms it is highly
doubtful that a mere power sharing agreement is a lasting solution to
the current conflict in South Sudan. Some may agree that power sharing
is the solution to the conflict. Others may disagree while still there
may be those who are not so sure. This may all suggest that the
conflict is complicated. The complication is that the conflict has
taken ethnic and regional dimensions where insecurity is the order of
the day. A conception of power sharing agreement as a solution to the
conflict is therefore too simplistic.
For any meaningful resolution of the conflict in South Sudan the
primary priority is a holistic institutional reform. Reforms in
governance, in the economy and in the security sector are a key to
sustainable peace and stability. In governance the reform is the
adoption of a federal system of government in a multi-ethnic,
multi-lingual and multi-cultural country such as South Sudan where
there are also regional diversities.
In a federal system powers are devolved to a lower level where there
is autonomy with less interference from the national government.
Through autonomy people have some freedom to run their affairs in
their own way. This will likely promote unity in diversity. In South
Sudan there could be three federal regions of Bahr el Ghazal,
Equatoria and Upper Nile headed by prime ministers while the federal
government is headed by a president. Within a federal region there
could also be autonomous states with the three arms (executive,
judiciary and legislature) of government headed by governors.
Alternatively, the existing ten states in South Sudan could form the
federation.
Reforms in governance
I am aware that a proposal for a federal system will be construed as
“Kokora” by people less informed and lacking in confidence. There is
no better system than a federal one in addressing the plethora of
problems South Sudan faces on daily basis. The naïve ones and the less
informed will erroneously perceive that a federal system divides
people. This is false. On the contrary, a federal system promotes
unity in countries, for example, with diversities of multi-ethnic,
multi-lingual and multi-cultural backgrounds. Federal states are found
in Africa, in the Americas, in Asia and in Europe. However, only the
fearful with a hidden agenda are the opponents.
A centralized system is likely to create rebellions and a possible
breakup of a country. The old Sudan is a good case study. The then
Southern Sudan demanded a federal system of government to preserve the
unity of the old Sudan but the demand was utterly rejected. The rest
is for students of history. Hopefully South Sudan will not breakup the
way the old Sudan did under naïve Arab Islamic leadership. Learning
from the insensitivity in old Sudan, it is hoped that the leadership
of South Sudan will be wiser.
Reforms in security sector
Institutional reforms in the security sector is of paramount
importance in promoting a strong united South Sudan. South Sudan is a
country of 72 ethnic groups. In the national peace conference of South
Sudan tribes convened under the theme “Peace Now! South Sudan Tribes
United Against War” at Nyokuron Culture Centre on 17 – 18 February
2015, 72 ethnic groups were identified and listed. This is an update
of the previous number of 65 ethnic groups considered to be in South
Sudan.
The existence of 72 ethnic groups in South Sudan clearly suggests
reforms in the security sector must reflect the ethnic diversity of
the country. Not having representatives of the 72 ethnic groups in the
security sector is a clear disaster in the waiting. As power corrupts
it is very unwise to have any ethnic group to dominate in the security
sector because it will be extremely arrogant and this does not bode
well in promoting national unity. It has been seen that people in
uniform grab land using arms but are not accountable for their
criminal behavior. The implication is clear.
In reforms in the security sector, a state in the federation should
have its own home guards/militia to handle hardcore criminals. The
state should also establish its own organized forces such as the
police, criminal investigation department, the prisons wildlife and
the fire brigade.
For economic reforms the states should have the power to tax in order
to raise revenue for investment in development projects. They should
have the power, without interference from the centre, to develop
natural resources such as agriculture, forestry, animal resources and
fisheries. They also should have the power to prospect for oil and
minerals such as gold, uranium, zinc and so forth. For self-reliance,
paramount in reforms is economic development, judiciary, public
services and structures at all levels.
In all, the reform agenda is about the rule of law, the promotion of
good governance and the protection of human rights. However, this
cannot happen without strong and implementable guarantees. For
example, in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2005 Abyei was
to have a referendum either to join Sudan or South Sudan. This did not
happen. Also in the CPA the resolution of the conflict in Southern
Kordofan and Blue Nile States did not happen. Right now wars of
liberation are raging in those two States. This is an indication that
without strong guarantees and committed guarantors an agreement will
likely be dishonored with impunity.
As a resolution of the conflict in South Sudan there must be committed
guarantors and they should be the mediators, and those who have
actively participated in bringing about any agreement on reforms. This
is the only way to have a vibrant united South Sudan where every
citizen identifies with and ultimately calls it a motherland. This is
also how to save the country from collapsing.
It will be a waste of time and valuable resources for any agreement
which is supposed to address the current conflict in South Sudan is
only restricted to power sharing. Without guaranteed institutional
reforms it is most likely that the conflict will recur with far
reaching consequences.
In conclusion, the only salvation of South Sudan from disunity and
possible breakup is institutional reform where a strongly guaranteed
federation of either three regions or ten states is adopted,
reflecting the diversities of the country. There should also be a
reform in the SPLM, where among other things, a timeframe should be
indicated as to when any member can start to campaign for the
leadership. This is to avoid the way Salva Kiir Mayardit was being
openly challenged at any time by members without respect.
Jacob K. Lupai is the author of the book: South Sudan, Issues in
Perspective published in 2014. The book is available in St Joseph
Bookshop and in JIT Supermarket in Juba, and at Juba International
Airport. For students who would like to borrow the book, copies owned
by Juba University are available in the library.
--
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/southsudankob
View this message at
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/southsudankob/topic-id/message-id
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout
---
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/CAJb14oq9mcBd-6DE2FyATx-FoAGBONf99E789JWgaiyoxeto-A%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
