Yearender: Sudan, South Sudan separation fails to bring in peace, stability
5 min readKHARTOUM, Dec. 27 (Xinhua) — The separation with the South marks the most prominent event in Sudan in 2011, yet the much- anticipated resolution of the ethnic dispute fell short of bringing in peace and stability between the North and the South.
With the Jan. 9 referendum producing an outright majority in favor of the South’s independence, lasting peace seemed achievable for the country that went through two civil wars, the second being fiercely fought for 23 years until a comprehensive ceasefire was signed in 2005.
Following the vote, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir issued a decree accepting the result of the referendum and his government declared its respect to the will of the voters.
On July 9, Juba, the capital of the South, witnessed the grand celebration of a new-born nation in the presence of the world’s dignitaries including President al-Bashir.
However, conflicts ensued shortly over the pending issues between the more-developed North and the oil-rich South, despite the reassurance of resolution that Sudanese President al-Bashir and South Sudanese President Salva Kiir Mayardit pledged on the independence day.
Less than a week after the separation, Juba announced its plan to launch a new currency, going against an earlier agreement that the Sudanese pound would stay for six months in the new-born country. Angered by the breach, the Central Bank of Sudan also issued a new currency to counteract the move.
Moreover, a number of unresolved issues, most notably border demarcation, oil sharing and external debts, continued to cast shadows over peace and stability between Sudan and South Sudan.
Regarding border demarcation, the status of the oil-rich Abyei and South Kordofan, both located on the border-in-dispute, is the most complicated issue in debate between Khartoum and Juba.
In February, when the South was still in the transitional period (after referendum and before independence), its Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) attacked a convoy of the Sudanese army in Abyei, causing the death of 22 Sudanese soldiers. Three months later, in the ensuing escalation of tensions, the North expelled the SPLA fighters and took full control of the area.
Conflict in Abyei was eased by negotiations held in the Ethiopian capital of Addis Ababa, which resulted in the withdrawal of both sides’ troops and the deployment of Ethiopian forces under the UN peacekeeping command. However, the status of Abyei remains unresolved and continues to be a flash-point issue.
Meanwhile, the bloody clashes in South Kordofan just days before the separation put the North-South relations to a test. Khartoum accused Juba of supporting the SPLA’s northern sector in assaulting Sudanese army in the area, where a month ago the North’ s ruling NCP won the local elections and has the legitimacy to govern.
Although talks in Addis Ababa produced in late June a framework agreement that tasked a joint committee with security arrangements in disputed areas, the deal has not been implemented yet as it is strongly opposed by some NCP members.
In early September, violence broke out in another contested area Blue Nile, where the SPLA’s northern sector clashed again with the Sudanese army.
President al-Bashir declared a state of emergency in Blue Nile and replaced Governor Malik Aqar with a military ruler. After fierce fighting, the Sudanese army seized al-Kurmuk, a stronghold of the SPLA’s northern sector in Blue Nile.
The battle cost the lives of about 20,000 SPLA fighters and SPLA commander Abdul-Aziz Al-Hilu fled to the Ethiopian border.
What happened in South Kordofan and Blue Nile prompted the Sudanese government to file a complaint to the UN Security Council in September, which accused South Sudan of supporting the fighters in the border areas, which Juba refuted as “baseless allegations.”
Moreover, South Sudanese President Kiir’s first visit to Khartoum in early October failed to defuse the tensions. Although the two leaders succeeded in forming a joint committee to settle the pending issues in a concrete time frame, the last round of talks in late November brokered by the African Union (AU) bore no fruit.
Most recently, the split over oil sharing emerged again when Khartoum threatened to block Juba’s oil exports via its territory unless it pays the transit fee as well as the 727 billion U.S. dollars in debt. But only days after, Sudan revoked the decision and said it would accept oil as payment.
Oil resources have long been a cause of conflicts between the two sides, with the South producing about 75 percent of the total oil and the North owning most of the oil refineries, pipelines and export ports.
Long before the separation, the South had been demanding exporting oil via its own facilities and resenting the exploitation of its resources by the North.
The recent oil split remains unsolved and no official agreement has been reached on the transit fee. Although the AU offered some proposals aimed at settling the issue, South Sudan deems the proposals unfair and unreasonable.
“No war, yet no peace” are keywords that characterize the status quo between Sudan and its new-born southern neighbor. Under such circumstances, the two countries on one hand “live” inter- dependently due to their economic ties, particularly in the energy sector, and on the other hand political and military conflicts continue to take place over the unresolved issues.
The differences between the North and the South are not to be bridged any time soon. Since shaking off colonial rule till the comprehensive ceasefire deal in 2005, the North and the South had been at war except the 10 years from 1972 to 1982. It may take no shorter for the two sides to resolve the issues that stand out on their path towards peace and stability.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2011-12/28/c_131330192.htm
About Post Author
