UN Media Stakeout with Amb. Rice and Amb. Oswaha
7 min readSC President, Susan Rice (USA) on Western Sahara/conflict between Sudan and South Sudan – Security Council Media Stakeout – 17 April 2012
Ambassador Rice: Good afternoon. The Security Council had sessions both on the Western Sahara and on the situation between Sudan and South Sudan, and I’ll brief you on both, starting with Western Sahara.
“……The Council held an informal interactive dialogue on the latest developments on the border between Sudan and South Sudan with former president Thabo Mbeki, the AU High Level Implementation Panel Chair, and UN Special Envoy Haile Menkerios. They described a disturbing situation in which both parties are locked in and I quote, “a logic of war.” Mbeki and Menkerios described the divergent views of the two parties on the current situation. They stress that hardliners are winning the day in both Juba and Khartoum and urged the Security Council to engage with both governments directly to convince them to walk back their positions. Council members expressed grave concern over the situation and committed to make every effort to convince the parties to cease hostilities and return to the negotiating table.
Council members reiterated their demand for a complete, immediate, and unconditional end to all fighting, the withdrawal of the SPLA from Heglig, and an end to Sudanese armed forces aerial bombardments; an end to repeated incidents of cross-border violence and to support, by both sides, to proxies in each other’s country. They also reiterated their demand that Sudan and South Sudan redeploy their security forces immediately from Abyei. Council members discussed ways to leverage the influence of the Council to press the parties to take these steps and included in that a discussion potentially of sanctions.
The Council agreed to continue urgent deliberations on how best to address the situation—happy to take a few questions.
Reporter: Yeah, on Sudan, Ambassador, in the lead up to referendum and afterward towards formal independence there was great fears in the international community there could be a war between the South and Sudan, and it didn’t happen, but it seems like it might be happening now. Could you broadly say why we’ve come to this point now? Why has that peace not held?
Ambassador Rice: Well, with respect to Sudan and South Sudan, I think many of us have seen and been concerned about the potential for a resumption of violence, primarily as we discussed today, because of the many unresolved issues in the comprehensive peace agreement. They have no agreement on oil. They have no agreement on their border. They have no agreement on citizenship. They have no agreement on Abyei, and indeed, these were issues that were meant to be resolved before independence. Also, in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile, the popular consultations and the political process which was to incorporate all of the people of those regions into the larger Sudan were abandoned.
And so all of these factors have remained unresolved, and both sides have taken—both prior to July 9th and subsequent to July 9th—actions designed to test and provoke and undermine the other. And they have escalated into the situation that we see today.
Reporter: Thanks a lot. The allegation is that the JEM rebels from Darfur are now fighting with the Sudanese Army in Heglig. There are media accounts of them pulling in and hand-slapping and what not. And so, some people think that this means the goal of this is the overthrow of the Bashir regime, and I just wanted to know, was this discussed in the Council? What does the US think of JEM presence in Heglig or fighting alongside the South Sudan Army.
Ambassador Rice: There was discussion in the context of Mbeki’s briefing about the perception in Khartoum, that the South’s objectives are regime change, and he reported indeed that the North has said, if that is the case and they believe it to be so, their objective is now also regime change. I think frankly, one would hope that this is rhetoric and not the objective or the purported objective of either side. Reality is both sides have over time provided support to proxies in each other’s territory. There is little doubt about that. It has continued in both directions and it needs to end as we have said on a national basis and the Council has said on an international basis.
Thank you.
Amb. Agnes Oswaha, Acting Deputy Permanent Representative (Charge’ de affairs), Permanent Mission of the Republic of South Sudan on the situation in Sudan – Security Council Media Stakeout – 17 April 2012
Notes:
Juba ready to return to the negotiating table:
·As we heard from the Security Council, they are calling for Sudan and South Sudan to immediately return to the negotiating table.
·It has been our repeated call to Khartoum to return back to the negotiating table.
·The current crisis will be resolved through a negotiated and agreed upon solution.
Current situation on the border:
·The situation is deteriorating – there is indiscriminate bombing along the border
·SAF using MIG 29 jets and Antonovs to bomb Warrap, Unity and Upper Nile states, along with Heglig area, destroying the oil fields.
·We took Heglig out of self-defense and because SAF has been using the area as a military operational base to wage their attacks against the RoSS.
Qu: Rice mentioned SPLA is fighting along-side JEM –and maybe SLA and SPLM-N. Is there a united front? What is the follow-up to the sacking of Machar’s House in Khartoum that was mentioned in the RoSS letter to the UNSC?
·RoSS’s policy is very clear. It is the policy of noninterference into another states affairs. We have no interest to interfere in Sudan’s affairs.
·We responded to SAF out of self-defense. We said it over and over we are not going on the offense, but we will defend our territory.
·As we speak our forces are within our boundaries– the border of 1956.
·Khartoum intelligence or military forces have attacked the house of his Excellency, VP Machar. It was vandalized and people in the house were arrested – we don’t know where they are. It adds to our concern about Southerners in Sudan.
oWe called upon the citizens of South Sudan to be peaceful to the northerners that are residing in RoSS.
oWe’ll uphold our national and international obligation to protect them and we call upon Sudan to do likewise to Southerners in Sudan.
·Sudan has declared that South Sudan is an enemy of the state. To us that is not a surprise; we have been their enemies from day one.
Qu: Mbeki said there appears to be a logic of war on both sides – have hardliners taken over in Juba as they are said to have taken over in Khartoum?
·We are open to negotiations. Khartoum walked out of negotiations. We are still appealing to them to return to the negotiating table.
·All of this is a result of the fact the CPA was not fully implemented. If the border was demarcated we wouldn’t have the squabbling over the border or Heglig.
·Some people argue that we took Heglig to punish Khartoum since they lost ¼ of the oil. However, that was not our intention.
oIn the negotiations, we offered them 2.6 billion as a transitional grant to help with the economic safe landing. We also offered to help with their debts and to appeal to their debtors (WB IMF) to help with the process.
·Our intention is not regime change. We leave that to the citizens of Sudan.
·In South Sudan, we want to focus on development and service delivery – our people have suffered so much. It’s time to ensure we have a democratic government that meets the needs of the citizens.
Qu: Reports that the SPLA shot down a MIG 29 SAF Jet –is it true?
Yes, we shot down one MIG jet that had been hovering over our territory– but there are Antonovs and we will try to protect our citizens
Qu. Have you had discussions with the UN about a new peacekeeping force or expanding UNISFA?
The UN is looking into the situation – but we cannot speak for them.
Transcript and notes provided by Crisis Action
About Post Author
