Africa bleeds from two Sudans’ internal wars (2)

SUDAN CEASED TO BE ONE on July 9, 2011, when the southern portion took on its own separate identity by becoming South Sudan. The formal declaration that led to the creation of South Sudan as an independent and distinct country from Sudan was a culmination of over 20 years of war and six years of autonomy. Sudan, old or new, has never been a stranger to civil strife. The First Sudanese Civil War was fought over a period between 1955 and 1972. It reportedly originated in southern Sudan, spreading far and wide and lasting for almost 22 years. It was probably nearly as long as the war between MPLA and UNITA forces, which lasted for 27 years in Angola before a ceasefire was brokered.
The second Sudanese Civil War stretched from 1983 to 2005, covering a period of almost 22 years and was between the central Sudanese government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army. It basically gave birth to the newly born independent South Sudan, just six years after the cessation of hostilities. The internal cleavages on regional and network grounds created an environment that tended to widen the gaps between the wealthier north and less-developed south. This led to discontent that triggered decades of violent conflict in the old Sudan. It was a bad idea that the South Sudanese Civil War was to start as a multi-dimensional civil war, beginning in 2013 and extending to 2020, between forces of the government and opposition.
South Sudan was born with a carryover of wars from its northern neighbour. Two leading warring personalities were also carried over as transition unfolded. These two rivals turned out to become leaders in the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) that led the rebellion to secede from Sudan. Meet Salva Kiir, sworn in as president, and his deputy, Riek Machar, who have so far proved that they are strange bedfellows in power. It may be asked at this point whether Kiir or Machar actually or truly want peace, particularly for the new country they jointly preside over. As it is presently in northern Sudan, where two warlords are fighting tooth and nail for the control of the levers of power, so has it been in South Sudan since 2013. While the fight in Khartoum is between two armed warlords, it could be said that the former warlords in charge of South Sudan are now civilians. But what is the endgame in South Sudan?
Just as the fight in the former old Sudan had obvious ethnic colouration, leading to ethnic-based violence, that of South Sudan is no exception. The struggle between Mohamed Dagalo, leader of the Rapid Support Services (RSF) and Abdel Fattah al-Burhan of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for the control of Sudan is costing the country dearly. Death tolls and the number of forced displacements of victims of this their personal struggles can at best be estimated. Yet, neither of them seems ready to back down or settle for a truce. But, the ordinary Sudanese civilian population is suffering as they serve as canon fodder, with no end in sight. South Sudan ex-warlords were at it before a truce was called. That tenuous truce has again got to a breaking point. The previous war took South Sudan backwards in many ways. Human rights abuses, including forced displacement, ethnic massacres, and killings of journalists were reported by various parties. As many as 3.9 million people have been displaced. The South Sudan crisis is affecting many neighbours. For instance, Uganda alone is hosting one million South Sudanese refugees.
Fundamental to these crises is the quest for the control of mineral resources. But the unhealthy struggle is complicating the conflict, worsening the economic woes and food shortages. South Sudan is back at it again as Kiir has reportedly arrested key Machar allies such as the oil minister and deputy army chief, while the army had surrounded his own house, a potential threat to the 2018 peace deal. Machar went to the trenches when a similar thing happened in 2013. He may do so again. The sad truth is that the outcome of Kiir’s action and Machar’s response then and now will only bring more misery and suffering upon the helpless people of South Sudan. Very much like in 2013, Sudan may once again descend into a devastating civil war that will claim hundreds of thousands of lives, causing millions to be displaced from their homes.
Salva Kiir is treading a familiar path in his handling of his vice president, Riek Machar. Their rivalries have become a big burden on South Sudan. The two men are rivals but have obviously known each other while using the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) to push for secession from Sudan, which is now South Sudan’s northern neighbour. The immediate or remote causes of these endless crises may not be far-fetched. The control of natural resources is one of them. South Sudan went away with over 75 percent of the oil reserves in Sudan. Rather than peacefully managing it for the benefits of the South Sudanese, the needless rivalries have become a drainpipe, in which case, the country still remains poor and a net donor recipient. It is, however, bogged down with the constraints and vulnerability to Sudan in the north as the latter retains control of all South Sudan’s pipeline and export facilities.
In March 2012, not long after South Sudan’s independence, the two Sudans had rough deals over oil. For nearly two months, they had a face-off over rights to the oil fields around Heglig, a town just inside Sudan, which accounts for half of Sudan’s crude oil production. There were actions and counter reactions, with northern Sudan confiscating millions of barrels of South Sudan crude. This led South Sudan into halting its production in January for more than a year, accusing Khartoum of theft. Hardly does Sudan in the north have time to fight externalities now that it is consumed in the bitter civil war. For South Sudan, a relapse to another bout of civil war will be most unfortunate. Its oil will be undervalued and sold at ridiculous prices to meet urgent wartime needs. Illicit buyers will like it. Humanitarian services may soon suffer serious setbacks as in the case of the previous war in which it was alleged by the UN that South Sudan warring sides were ‘deliberately starving’ citizens. The unity government of Kiir and Machar could be threatened. Peace and normalcy may once again elude the world’s newest country as a result of rivalries between two leaders jostling for superiority and control of the levers of power. This calls to question whether these leaders are fulfilling the expectations of their people who voted nearly 99 percent in favour of secession, leading up to the proclamation of independence after a referendum.
The two Sudans may still have disputes over the tracing of their common border and the status of disputed regions such as Abyei. The bitter past should not be allowed to repeat itself in South Sudan. It all began on July 23, 2013, when Kiir fired Machar and all government ministers, their deputies and several police brigadiers. The rest of what followed is now history. After the return of Machar from the trenches, a truce was made, with the president and rebel leader Machar agreeing to form a unity government. This unity government is now shaking in its foundation, in what the UN described as an extremely fragile peace.
It appears like a line has been drawn between Machar and Kiir. Machar recently accused Kiir of “dictatorial” behaviour. That was on December 6. It is disturbing that this is happening in South Sudan, giving reasons to be worried about the country’s future. Ten days later, on December 16, Kiir announced that his forces had thwarted an attempted coup by Machar. That was after a night of fighting in the capital, Juba. Machar denied involvement. Under the present circumstances, a repeat of ethnic clashes of many years ago is feared, especially as rival army units clash in Juba, similar to what is happening in Khartoum in the northern neighbouring Sudan. Meanwhile, the fighting in South Sudan was also already spreading beyond the capital, fuelled by rivalries between Kiir’s majority Dinka ethnic group and Machar’s Nuer, the country’s second-largest ethnic group. When all the war-related atrocities, such as ethnic massacres, rape and recruitment of child soldiers become rampant again, South Sudan must have turned into a jungle of some sorts, which needs to be avoided. If, in the first instance, Machar and Kiir had signed a peace accord before in August 2015 that provided for Machar’s reappointment as vice president and he was sworn in on April 26, 2016, who then is to blame for the avoidable killings and the deaths of people on account of the Kiir’s face-off with Machar?
It is obvious that both Kiir and Machar are culpable in destabilising South Sudan. They are supposed to step aside and allow elections to be done so that others may replace them. Enough of the whimsical approach of both men in power. Enough of frivolities leading to loss of lives at the end five years of war wherein more than 380,000 were killed and roughly four million people were forced out of their homes. If they have real succession plans and future plans for the country, we should not be reading or hearing about fights again between Kiir and Machar. Resuming office again as vice president under a power sharing agreement in 2018 and working together since then ought to have produced a plan strong enough to steer the ship of South Sudan into the future. Coming back to office on February 22, 2020, as the first vice president, Machar and Kiir agreed that outstanding issues will be negotiated under the new government. Five years on, what came out of the power sharing arrangement will be of interest. How are the problems of rampant high-level corruption and armed militias to be tackled? Who will tackle them? Here is a damning report from the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan: “More than half of the 12-million strong population face food shortages. This is in a country that is endowed with abundance of oil, but got off to a bad start two years after independence, and is now far off from the path of peace and tranquility. When will South Sudan develop and grow its economy while Kiir and Machar keep fighting over power?