Implications of Regional Protection Force for South Sudan
Article
Comments (1)
email Email
print Print
pdfSave
separation
increase
decrease
separation
separation
facebookmyspacetwitterbuzzyahoo
By James Okuk
After the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the IGAD Plus
held a Summit meeting on 5th August 2016 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, to
deliberate on the worrying situation of South, the communique that was
issued finally released the "genie out of the bottle", the deployment
of regional protection force to South Sudan with a mandate of:
1) Protection of vulnerable civilians including foreign dignitaries
and nation’s political leaders whose security is not seen to be
guaranteed by the state.
2) Protection of key installations (e.g., Juba Airport and Nimule
Highway) to be conducted jointly with TGoNU authorised security units.
3. Revitalisation and reinforcement of permanent ceasefire and
security arrangements as stipulated in the August 2015 Agreement on
the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (ARCSS).
4. Collaboration and coordination with the UNMISS peacekeeping forces
in order to accomplish the protection mission as effectively as
possible.
The language expressed in the 21-points of Communique resolutions is
very strong diplomatically. Core synopses are:
1) "Punitive measures" to be considered on those rejecting peace,
especially when South Sudan has become "a serious threat to regional
peace, security and stability" due to the big number of civilian
population who got displaced to the UNMISS camps, to neighboring and
other countries since December 2013 as they went fleeing from
brutalizing gun deaths and wounds, from looting and destruction of
their properties, from serious human rights abuses including rapes and
torture, from economic and humanitarian hardship; and also due to
"proliferation of illicit small arms and weapons".
2) "United stance" of the region to intervene with a military
protection force into South Sudan against the intransigence of
hardliners who want to dilute the ARCSS via fragrant violations for
their power interest.
3) "Strong support" to JMEC’s Chairperson so that he could show his
superior muscles to government in regards to oversight and remedial
actions for smooth implementation of the ARCSS.
4) "The government bears a heavy responsibility" and it is advised to
cooperate with the intervening foreign forces and honor the provisions
of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) so as not to invoke
confrontation with UNMISS and its regional allies in the protection or
peacekeeping mission.
5) "Return to the status quo ante in line with ARCSS" by bringing
together in Juba President Salva Kiir and the fired First Vice
President Dr. Riek Machar so that they could sincerely recommit
themselves to ARCSS implementation as they signed it.
6) "The Chairperson of the Commission to urgently transmit this
communiqué to the UN Secretary General and, through him, to the UN
Security Council for its action as appropriate and to engage all
concerned Africa’s partners to mobilize their support and to report on
her efforts to the Peace and Security Council" in South Sudan.
With these well-coordinated regional and international messages and
undertakings, it could be foreseen that the August 12, 2016 UN
Security Council meeting on South Sudan shall automatically vote for
uplifting and extending the UNMISS mandate, given the IGAD-Plus
communique and the above-mentioned directives given to the Chairperson
of the AU Commission.
The Communique’s content and directives sum it all whether we rename
the intervening regional force "protection force" or whatever
diplomatic words’ manoeuvrings. This can tell how Juba has lost the
sympathy of the region and the rest of the world while the common
people are terribly disturbed by the high prices of commodities in the
markets, which have now taken up more challenging arms to the
detrimental of happy life of the people. What used to sale at one
pound is now skyrocketing at ten pounds with government salaries kept
at minimal bay to a poor purchasing power of the employees, who have
now qualified to the decadent standards of "the working poor". What is
the way out from this cornering?
The left option now is to negotiate the entry date and other details
for the intervening regional protection force. Nothing much has been
left to Juba except ceremonial sovereignty as far as security is
concerned. Juba shall not be in a position to stop attack helicopters
and drones hoovering over South Sudan and landing anywhere under the
new mandate. No tanks and mounted Toyota Thatchers from warring
parties shall be allowed in Juba to protect any South Sudanese leader
in the city except pistols as it is a common practice in the civilised
countries. But will the security of hearts and minds be there for
those who are used to trusting the big guns for everything?
Perhaps the frontline states are now responding to President Kiir’s
caution (when he signed the deal in Freedom Hall in Juba last year)
that the ARCSS implementation shall be a nightmare if the guarantors
fail to impose it by force after they have done it by diplomacy. This
seems to be happening to the disbelief of hardliners and those who
were not prepared for Juba’s shift of stance due to the intensified
foreign pressure and massive civilian exodus. Juba has exhausted all
the cards and there was nothing left in its power to reject the
in-coming foreign protection force without being faced with dangerous
consequences.
But we must know that no intervening regional actor is there
innocently without some interests to secure:
1) The Sudan wants disarmament of its rebels as provided in ARCSS Chapter II.
2) Uganda wants to ensure that the Lord Resistance Army (LRA) and
other opposition don’t find a base in South Sudan.
3) Kenya wants to secure its big investments and finance (e,g., KCB,
Equity, Mombassa Port and other projects like LAPSSET) from South
Sudan.
4) Ethiopia doesn’t want to anger its Nuer and Anuak population who
can easily find tribal solidarity and support in South Sudan.
5) Rwanda is there to please the international community so as to
continue assisting it with more economic benefits and infrastructure,
and harvest the name of a successful post-conflict genocidal county in
Africa that deserves international prizes and praises.
But where is the interest of South Sudan in all these self-help
regional intervention? Perhaps it shall appear in ’restoration of
peace’ whose sustainability is supposed to lead to exit of the
intervening actors once their mission is accomplished even to a
satisfactory level. Nonetheless, this usually doesn’t take less than
five to ten years. The fashion has been a quick entry as the bad
situation invites but slow exit even when the situation gets improved
for a farewell.
The untimely call of the SPLM Secretary-General, Mr. Pagan Amum, for
foreign trusteeship is outdated. Knowing him as one of the toughest
propagandists and lobbyists the SPLM have had ever groomed, it can’t
escape his nuance that ’UN Trusteeship/Protectorateship" per se is not
saleable under UN Charter, Chapter VII articles 76 and 77 for an
independent country that has a recognised UN membership and a flag
with a diplomatic mission accredited in New York, though the
contemporary definition of sovereignty is predicated on:
a) Protection of the population without discrimination,
b) Undivided loyalty of the citizens to the state.
c) Enforceability of government powers within the jurisdictional
territorial integrity.
d) Cooperation with the UN and other international and regional bodies
based on treaties and conventions and with mutual recognition.
e) Viability of the state and sustainability of its government among
other nations.
May be Cde Pagan is using his "South Sudan Reborn" campaign for
attracting other attentions to South Sudan, particularly leadership
change for the old veterans who might not be willing to accept
’Generational Exit’ from power unless forced to quit by international
powers so that the middle age leaders could get a chance of
’Generational Entry’ to top power positions in the country.
It is high time the country’s leadership reflects deeply on the sorry
state of the internal affairs and revise the foreign policy
accordingly, especially after the government in Juba lost the
international respect and sympathy (unlike what used to be in the
past). Dialogue with the intervening foreign force is now a must.
There is a need to repair the sour relations with many former friendly
countries. There is a need to knock doors of some new countries for
widening the horizon of friendly relations. This could be achieved
through balanced and serious connections between political power,
economic opportunities, people-to-people socialization and avoidance
of tit-for-tat support for rebels or opposition groups, especially in
the neighbouring countries. Good neighborliness is the safest way to
adopt in order to reduce suspicious hostilities and conspiratorial
tensions at fragile times like this.
The country’s leadership needs to start paying keen attention to both
local and international public opinions so as to scrutinise the
accurate truth for a prudent and timely decision-making within the
recurring tough, contradictory and complicated unfolding situations.
Succumbing to dangerous deadlocks and arrogant intransigence is not
advisable now as the country needs to regain the lost goodwill of the
region and the world at large.
The hot case in point here is how the First Vice President, General
Taban Deng Gai, will get back to a junior position (i.e., a cabinet
minister) when Dr. Riek Machar is back in Juba to assume his lost
position as required by the ARCSS’ guarantors. Since Mr. Taban has
been lifted by a tricky situation to the highest level of the
Presidency how will he accept to fall lowest again in the SPLM-IO
hierarchy? Perhaps by a miracle (which is too holy for power
politics), or by total quitting to SPLM-IG’s side as he already
declared his allegiance to President Kiir (but where there are no
highest positions left), or by retiring from any ministerial position
(but which is so rare a practice in Third World’s politics).
All in all, it is high time all of us should embrace and learn to
handle foreigners without any deadly confrontation for the sake of
peace and prosperity of our innocent young generation and posterity so
that we don’t leave to them another Iraq, Somalia or Libya in South
Sudan. Our government gave half of Juba International Airport to
UNMISS from 2011 up to now and there have been no streets protest on
that. Ugandan forces were guarding Juba and Bor Airports from 2013 to
2015 and it was not a big deal to the sovereignty since it was done in
the name of good neighborly ’protection’. Our Airspace, especially for
oil installations in Greater Upper Nile, had been under Khartoum
surveillance and no question of sovereignty was raised on that.
Ethiopian Airline used to shift from international to domestic flight
by bringing passengers from Malakal to Juba from 2011 - 2012 and it
was not an issue to our government. Why all the "downs-downs and
dooms-dooms to the region and UN now"? Height of hypocrisy, isn’t it?
Our political leaders should learn that patience pays as Tanzanian
President Julius Nyerere advised Southerners in Juba in February 1974
during his visit for celebration of the second anniversary of the
Addis Ababa Agreement. When we are patient we shall all come out safer
at the end. Dialogue and Cooperation!
Comments on the Sudan Tribune website must abide by the following
rules. Contravention of these rules will lead to the user losing their
Sudan Tribune account with immediate effect.
- No inciting violence
- No inappropriate or offensive language
- No racism, tribalism or sectarianism
- No inappropriate or derogatory remarks
- No deviation from the topic of the article
- No advertising, spamming or links
- No incomprehensible comments
Due to the unprecedented amount of racist and offensive language on
the site, Sudan Tribune tries to vet all comments on the site.
There is now also a limit of 400 words per comment. If you want to
express yourself in more detail than this allows, please e-mail your
comment as an article to [email protected]
Kind regards,
The Sudan Tribune editorial team.
8 August 13:53, by Akol Liai Mager
Taban Deng has already initiated his willingness to step aside for
the sake of peace. The only three persons in our nation who will not
afford to live normal life outside power are Kiir Mayardit, Riek
Machar and Lam Akol. They have violently shown to the citizens of
South Sudan, the region, international community, friends and enemies
alike that they can do whatever it takes in order to be on top.
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14ookY_-MXoZmnw39bbXr_Rj_rJYZusT%3DQajwz%3Dd0OwjAZA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
