 |
|
Reuters
|
South Sudan's
President Salva Kiir will sign a peace deal tomorrow in the capital, Juba, in
the presence of regional leaders, according to his press secretary Ateny Wek
Ateny. President
Kiir last week declined to sign the deal and asked for an additional 15 days
for more consultations.
His
refusal to sign the deal to end the 18-month civil war was described as
"mind-boggling" by the chief mediator.
South Sudan: Obstacles To A Lasting
Peace
A year-and-a-half of peace processes
have not stopped South Sudan's collapse. Soldiers slaughter young boys, women are raped
and millions have fled as ceasefires are ignored and the fighting continues.
An expanded mediation team from the
regional body Igad and several other interested nations, known as IGAD Plus,
insists a permanent peace deal must be signed by 17 August.
But with time running out, the distance
between the two sides appears to be wide. "The gap is too big," one
rebel official told me.
Here are five of the main obstacles to
a lasting peace in South Sudan:
1.
The two main rivals
The key question. President Salva Kiir
and rebel leader Riek Machar have in the past committed to stopping the
fighting, only for both sides to break their word and launch offensives.
Do the leaders realise or care how much
the people are suffering? Are both sides prepared to make the necessary
compromises to end the war?
Will a tougher stance from the US and
regional leaders make a difference? What about the growing economic crisis?
It's clear that many South Sudanese
have grown frustrated with the inability of the leaders to make peace. Pressure
is mounting though: President Obama and others have warned of tough measures if
the 17 August deadline is missed, and South Sudan's churches have called on Mr
Kiir and Mr Machar to sign the latest peace proposal.
2.
Power-sharing
The Igad Plus peace proposal has been
widely disseminated, in an effort to get some sort of momentum behind it.
However, even before these negotiations
began the government and the rebels expressed reservations.
Image caption President Kiir rejects
the proposal to give the rebels de facto control of three states
The government doesn't like the idea of
a neutral third force controlling an otherwise demilitarised capital, Juba, and
rejects the plan to give the rebels de facto control of the three states most
affected by conflict (which contain the lucrative oilfields).
The rebels want a dominant share in the
national government, and a federal system.
South Sudanese civil society groups
have also criticised the proposal for putting too much emphasis on
power-sharing among the elite, rather than insisting on accountability and
justice, or resolving underlying issues that caused the conflict.
The key is to see the Igad Plus
proposal as a basis for negotiations, rather than a final document. Under
regional and international pressure, some sort of peace agreement is possible.
At the moment, the government and the
rebels are arguing over power-sharing arrangements, essentially fine-tuning a
return to the status quo ante.
But if the root causes of the conflict
aren't resolved, it is difficult to see it bringing lasting peace.
3.
South Sudan's neighbours
Over the past 18 months, South Sudan's
neighbours have taken a leading role in mediating between the warring parties.
Yet this has been compromised by their
own involvement in the conflict.
Uganda intervened militarily in support
of President Kiir, to the frustration of the rebels. Sudan is allegedly
providing logistics, weapons and bases to Mr Machar's army.
Image caption Two generals have
recently split from Mr Machar's rebel group
Other countries are not implicated
militarily in South Sudan, but have important economic interests there (Kenya)
or wish to drive the mediation process (Ethiopia).
A satisfactory peace deal will mean
finding agreement among all of South Sudan's divided neighbours.
4.
Rebel unity
Mr Machar's rebel group was always an
uneasy coalition of civilian militias and military units that defected from the
national army, the SPLA.
The split announced this week by
well-known generals including Peter Gadet and Gathoth Gatkuoth was no surprise:
the men had been sidelined, in part because of their opposition to Mr Machar's
apparent willingness to consider a power-sharing deal.
There had always been concern about
whether Mr Machar could bring all his movement with him. Now we are about to
find out.
Two key questions here: do the generals
have enough support on the ground to constitute a powerful military force of
their own?
And will they receive the external
military support they will need to flourish?
Image caption Many South Sudanese have
known little but war and some, like this man, have lost their homes
This would be most likely to come from
Sudan, as Gen Gadet has fought for Khartoum several times in the past.
Another possibility is that hardliners
in both Mr Kiir's and Mr Machar's camp could use the split as an excuse not to
sign a peace deal.
5.
Deepening ethnic animosity
Millions of South Sudanese have known
hardly anything but war.
At the time of the united Sudan, the
first north-south civil war lasted from 1955-1971, and the second was even
longer (1983-2005).
After South Sudan's independence in
2011, it wasn't long before this new civil conflict erupted - in December 2013.
Tragically, war is part of life for
many. South Sudan is a militarised society, where the military men run
politics.
Those in command often have ethnic power bases,
bringing an ethnic dimension to most conflicts.
No comments:
Post a Comment