PaanLuel Wël Media Ltd – South Sudan

"We the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much, with so little, for so long, we are now qualified to do anything, with nothing" By Konstantin Josef Jireček, a Czech historian, diplomat and slavist.

what would a transitional government look like?

South Sudan crisis: what would a transitional government look like?

Failed ceasefire led to proposals for an interim government but leadership and accountability are major sticking points

South Sudan’s president Salva Kiir, who announced that elections would not be held until at least 2017. Photograph: Andreea Campeanu/Reuters

Little of value has emerged from the ceasefire agreed this month between South Sudan‘s president, Salva Kiir, and Riek Machar, the opposition leader.

The plan was to halt hostilities, allow humanitarian groups access to combat zones, and – crucially, given that elections in the world’s youngest state have been postponed until at least 2017 – start planning for a transitional government. The reality was a cessation of clashes that lasted less than seven hours.

The abortive agreement did, however, prompt wider discussions about the kind of system South Sudan needs to emerge from conflict and start rebuilding. That will come as particularly welcome news to the Development Policy Forum, a group of more than 50 South Sudanese academics, civil servants and lawyers that gathers periodically for structured discussions about the country’s future. A session in February about rebuilding institutions inspired some of the members to draft a plan of what a transitional body might look like.

The resulting vision was released the day after Kiir and Machar signed their agreement. It calls for a government overhaul, including a five-person collegial presidency with seats for each of the regions.

Its main function would to be promote social cohesion, while a 21-person cabinet of technocrats would focus on strengthening oversight bodies, organising a census, writing a constitution and jumpstarting the economy. The proposal even floats the idea of temporarily eliminating the parliament, because the interim period would require “less legislation and more of execution of decisions and programmes of government”. The three-year transitional period would culminate in multiparty elections.

Lual Deng, managing director of the Ebony Centre for Strategic Studies, which created the forum, said its members wanted the interim government to lay the foundation for resilient institutions and effective governance.

Abraham Awolich, a policy analyst at the Sudd Institute, a local thinkthank, said the success of any transitional model would hinge on persuading people that the new system would improve their lives. He said the forum’s draft had received a lot of attention because it was “putting people back at the centre of the government’s job”, with its call for economic reforms and a timeline for the construction of hospitals and roads.

Many issues are unaddressed in the 21-page draft. The US ambassador Susan Page, who has called for a transitional system, said she was looking for a proposal that took on the issue of accountability for the recent violence. “People need to be able to mourn … and understand why this happened. For that, you need accountability,” she said.

Members are working to integrate suggestions before circulating a final proposal to the government, the opposition and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the regional economic body mediating South Sudan’s peace talks in Ethiopia.

What will definitely not be included, Deng said, was a recommendation on who would lead the interim government. He said he preferred to leave that to the political parties and other political elites.

But even as the forum attempts to present a comprehensive proposal, Awolich said avoidance of this question could derail the plan’s viability. “Riek Machar and Salva Kiir are at the centre of this conflict,” he said. “They have huge constituencies that have agreed to their ideas.”

Now that the creation of a transitional government has been integrated into the peace process, the conflict will not be resolved if either side disagrees with a formal proposal. Which is why another, less-discussed policy draft focuses on the question of leadership.

Peter Biar Ajak, director of the independent South Sudan-based Centre for Strategic Analyses and Research, has called on Kiir and Machar to facilitate a transitional government, but not to be part of it. He says this is the only way to develop new political leaders who can embark on building competent and credible institutions to return the country to the path of development and democracy.

His argument is not gaining a lot of traction in government circles. The foreign minister, Barnaba Marial Benjamin, made the administration’s position clear when he confirmed that Kiir would remain in power until the elections take place.

The president recently announced that the polls would not be held until 2017, at the earliest. The delay, he said, would allow the country time to recover from the current crisis. And while the administration remained open to a transitional arrangement before the vote, Benjamin said the specifics of this agreement would come into effect only after a ceasefire.

Opposition supporters are equally adamant that they will not accept any transitional body that includes Kiir. And in a climate where Kiir and Machar’s demands take priority, there are as yet no proposals that can break this stalemate.

 

About Post Author