Press Statement on VP James Wani Igga’s Visit to the UN –Part 4
Press Statement on VP James Wani Igga’s Visit to the UN (4)
Peacekeeping Operations in South Sudan
October 2, 2015 (SSB) — The VP was invited on the 28th to attend a summit on peacekeeping operations. Even if the speakers were exclusively from the countries that contributed troops for UN peacekeeping operations, the topic touches on South Sudan because it is a host country of UN blue helmets.
The issue is of a central concern for world peace and security. The last decade has witnessed many cases of state failure and collapse, especially in the Middle East, Far East, and Africa. These cases call for wise peacekeeping interventions by the UN in order for the countries which are meant to be assisted through UN Peace Keeping Operations to become peaceful.
While the UN has been sending peacekeeping forces into African countries, especially in the last couple of decades, South Sudan’s experience with working alongside peacekeepers started in 2005, when their presence was stipulated in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), an IGAD/ U.S/UN brokered agreement leading to South Sudan’s independence.
Not until then had the country shared an operation environment with foreign forces that are supposed to be friendly. Throughout its long history of resisting foreign forces, starting from fighting against more than two slave hunting battalions sent to South Sudan by the Ottoman Empire in 1920 and culminating in the last twenty one years of civil war against Khartoum 1983-2005, all foreign armies in South (ern) Sudan had been enemy combatants.
However, things have changed now, as the country shares peacekeeping in its vast territory with more than twelve thousand UN blue helmets. And considering that they are sent to keep peace, peace should be made to exist before it is kept.
New Strategies and Environment in UN Peacekeeping:
Looking at the billions of dollars that have been pouring into Africa in the name of peacekeeping operations, a fraction of that money could help ten folds if it were injected into the concept of peace through development. Sitting there and watching or preventing former adversaries from getting into each other’s necks has not prevented conflict reoccurrence, why not change the approach to peacekeeping then?
There is no doubt that the evolution of UN peacekeeping operations towards embracing a new concept of peacekeeping through capacity building and development is important and cannot wait for tomorrow. This is of a particular importance in Africa where poverty is undoubtedly at the heart of conflict triggers. It is the only path available if the UN Security Council is to help countries reach sustainable peace after protracted civil wars.
Since peacekeepers operate to keep peace, then extensive funding of such initiatives as DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization, and Rehabilitation) have gone a long away into cementing post-conflict peacekeeping in some African countries. Sierra Leon and Liberia are examples of such successes.
However, the flip side is that when DDR is not well funded, post-conflict peacekeeping have not produced any results, Congo DRC is a strong example which needs urgent adjustment. We hope the case of South Sudan will be treated like those of Sierra Leon and Liberia.
The importance of the summit which triggered these observations lies in the fact that South Sudan must address this issues as it braces itself to sign and implement the new mandate for UNMIS (UN Mission in South Sudan), as well as sign and implement a status of forces agreement (SOFA).
While the VP was not allowed to give a statement, he nevertheless interacted with leaders of those countries that contribute to peace keeping operations in the world, especially those expected to be deployed to South Sudan as part of the recently signed IGAD-Plus agreement. On these ‘informal’ side talks the VP stressed that the agenda of state sovereignty under an environment of peacekeeping operations is an important one to consider while developing peacekeeping strategies.
VP stressed that the main question for contributors and host countries of blue helmets is how do we navigate between state sovereignty, state control, and externally driven peacekeeping operations? He emphasized and brought forward this extremely important agenda for all of the countries involved in the South Sudan case to find best practices and evolve better strategies as we move forward together towards a shared dream of a peaceful country.
UNMISS and SPLM-IO
Considering that one of the fears of Dr. Riek which is preventing him from coming to Juba is his distrust of government forces, it would be a good idea to include the safety of Dr. Riek and his colleagues as-well-as the FDs in the new agreement with UNMISS. Having successfully sheltered hundreds of thousands of women and children in Bentiu, Malakal, Bor, and Juba, there is no reason why UNMISS could not take that mandate of protecting Dr. Riek and his colleagues for thirty months.
In fact, that would be a better alternative since the presence of a large contingent of Dr. Riek’s forces in Juba might create a tense atmosphere which would overwhelm the goodwill towards implementing the agreement that parties are beginning to exhibit. In addition, the fighting forces on both sides have for some reason respected UN forces over the last twenty months and understood the grave implications of attacking them for whatever reason, even in pursuit of enemy combatants.
As it has been stressed again and again by the government’s delegation in New York, there is no way that the agreement could be reopened for renegotiations to allow some adjustments for accommodating the issue of Dr. Riek’s security in Juba. The final draft signed by both parties acknowledged the sovereignty of South Sudan and did not even specify the number of forces that Juba could retain as part of the country’s presidential guards. Even the 195 or so that was granted to Dr. Riek in the previous draft was withdrawn in the last one.
There is no reason why the country should not give Dr. Riek and his colleague the benefit of doubt with regard to his intention to return to Juba and start implementing the agreement. Whether this seeming seriousness to come to Juba is because he has lost his military forces on the ground, or seeing that his old friends are beginning to abandon him, or even the more important fact of people in greater Upper Nile beginning to lament the day he decided to take up arms and send them deep into the abyss of misery and slow death, it seems that Dr. Riek has realized that the war is no longer about power, which is drawing farther away from him. The best thing to do in such circumstance is to get back to Juba and preach peace.
We are yet to see the content of the new UNMISS mandate. Nevertheless, what we could be sure of is that it is not going to be even closer to the old mandate. Because there are new realities on the ground, such us continuing to provide protection to civilians who took refuge in Protection of Civilian’s camps across the country, and considering a possible protection of politicians like Dr. Riek, we hope that UNMISS should not lose sight of its mandate an start meddling into Juba politics.
David Mayen Ayarbior, Press Secretary of the VP, H.E. James Wani Igga. New York. Mayen.ayarbior@gmail.com
About Post Author
