South Sudan: Africa's Newest Republic

By Adan Makina

March 14, 2020

 

Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability but comes through continuous struggle. And so, we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom. A man can't ride you unless your back is bent---Martin Luther King, Jr.

After two-decades of armed insurrections, rebellious transgressions, and wanton belligerence, representatives of the Sudanese government and the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/M) finally signed a peace treaty in Naivasha, Kenya in 2005 under the auspices of the United Nations (UN). Led and represented by Dr. John Garang de Mabior (June 23, 1945 – July 30, 2005) in the historic signing ceremony, the inhabitants of South Sudan looked forward to a day when they would cast their votes in order to determine their future. That anticipated time has finally come. An internationally supervised voting referendum was held from January 9 to January 11, 2011 on

whether Southern Sudan should remain a part of Sudan or become independent. Consistent with reports by the global media, the week-long voting has so far been peaceful apart from a few isolated incidents. According to Jimmy Carter, former President of the United States, the referendum met all expectations and international standards. On the other hand, the inhabitants of the natural resources rich Abyei region of Sudan are also expected to hold a referendum at a later date to establish their wishes. South Sudan is expected to become Africa’s newest republic on July 9, 2011.

Modern Sudan evolved from the ashes of the collapsed Ottoman Empire. It became part of the Anglo-Egyptian condominium that lasted from 1898 to 1955. Colluding powers England and Egypt set two separate administrative arrangements for the north and south. Sudan, Africa’s largest country has been through two devastating wars: the first lasted from 1955 to 1972 and the second and the longest from 1982 to 2005.

Since gaining independence in 1956, Sudan has been led by a system of government dominated by leaders claiming Arabian decent. Demographically, north Sudan is dominated by people of Arab origin who are for the most part Muslims while the south is divided between followers of Christianity

South Sudan President Salva Kiir Mayardit

and traditional African religions. For over half-century Sudan has been at the mercy of a succession of military leaders with appalling human rights records. Unequal distribution of wealth and imposed hierarchy practiced by north Sudanese leaders plunged the nation into systemic violence. Following the toppling of Prime Minister Sadiq al-Mahdi in a coup d’état instigated by the current sitting president Hassan al-Bashir in 1989, Sudan descended into a cycle of violence consequently setting the stage for a prolonged conflict. In 1981, President Ja’afar an-Nimeiry, working in cahoots with the Islamic Brotherhood, the world’s largest and oldest Islamist group, endorsed a dramatic shift toward Islamist political governance. An-Nimeiry’s staunch Islamist views culminated in a clash with modernism and reformism. An-Nimeiry was once described by New York Times writer Dennis Hevesi as a “leader with shifting politics”. [1]An-Nimeiry was a man of shifting alliances such that he switched from being an ardent supporter of Arab nationalism to socialism, from having friendly relations with the Soviet Union to being pro-Western and a close ally of the United States. The imposition of Islamic Shariah and the discovery of oil in the south agitated the predominantly black population who aggressively intensified their fight for self-determination. The application of defensive realism (a variant of political realism) by the bureaucracy in Khartoum resulted in protracted security dilemmas. Thus, too much emphasis on security by the state set the stage for greater instability. Likewise, northern Arab rulers applied Hobbesian anarchy as the

The Late Dr. Garang de Mabior

dominant instrument to dominate the southerners. Successive administrations inclined to various theoretical thoughts ranging from realism, constructivism, and Marxism. Foreign powers driven by raison d’être also defined as national interest which incorporates a country’s political, military, and cultural goals and ambitions jumped on the bandwagon to scavenge for available scarce resources in South Sudan. The primary historical contention in a nation’s survival depends on the search for wealth, economic growth, and power.

In his book, Conflicts and Politics of Identity in Sudan, Amir Idris describes how northern Sudanese rulers manipulated black Sudanese Muslims. The author describes tormenting inhuman practices employed by northern Arab leaders that were aimed at crippling all forms of insurgency by black Sudanese confessing faiths other than Islam. By conscripting black Sudanese Muslims into the army to fight black rivals who did not profess the Islamic faith, northern Arab leaders employed a strategy

Hassan al-Bashir

that became known as “Aktul al-Abid bil Abid”-a phrase that translates to-“kill the slave through the slave”. [2] In response to the north’s forcible imposition of Shariah law and gross injustices against fellow Christians in the south, right-wing Christian groups pressured the U.S. Government for intervention. To avoid a repeat of the Rwanda massacre of 1994 in which majority Hutus slaughtered over 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus, the United States applied international diplomacy to find an everlasting solution to south Sudan’s simmering political imbroglio.

According to American national security policy, sovereign states are categorized as either being allies, adversaries, potential adversaries, or others. NATO member states are best described as allies; potential adversaries are those countries that explicitly display open hatred to the U.S. and at the same time possess military muscle; and with the exception of some friendly nations in the Middle East (Egypt) that fall under the “allies” category, almost the entire third world belong to the “others” category. [3] Accordingly, the United States, working in concert with the United Nations, made a smart move against the government in Khartoum by using the United Nations High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Changes which led to the successful mobilization of the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS). UNMIS was established by resolution 1590 of the Security Council on 24 March 2005. [4] Other than having national interests in Sudan, the U.S. is driven by moral responsibility to prevent human rights abuses in South Sudan and as well to end the genocide in Darfur. Further institutionalized by the UN reform effort in 2005, The Responsibility to Protect-or ‘R2P’-report of 2001 by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) established the intervention of the international community should nations fail to protect their citizens. The statutes of ICISS promoted and strengthened America’s resolve in Sudan. [5]

Salva Kiir Mayardit, the current president of the semi-autonomous government of Southern Sudan and the Vice President of Sudan-the man slated to be the future president of Southern Sudan-has in the past called for the separation of the south from the north. While commenting on the recent referendum in 2009, Kiir admonished southerners to either choose being “a second class in your country” or “a free person in your own independent state”. Political analysts and commentators and media personalities who have been closely watching the political events in southern Sudan, noted unifying sense of euphoria and a yearning for national sovereignty that was visible on the faces of millions of southerners casting their votes.

Countries like Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo DRC), and the Central African Republic (CAR) that share border with Southern Sudan have a lot to gain from Africa’s newest republic. For example, apart from having cordial relations with the anticipated republic, Kenya has vast business dealings ranging from banking, energy, transportation, and education in Southern Sudan. An estimated 70,000 Kenyans reside in Juba alone. In the past, the Kenya government played a major role in Sudan’s quest for peace and reconciliation. Top SPLA/M cadres established residences in Kenya’s major cities with top cadres owning palatial homes in Nairobi and other cities. Likewise, Kenya resettled thousands of South Sudanese refugees in its northern camp of Kakuma and a vast number of Sudanese students call Kenya home. Chances are that thousands of ordinary Kenyan citizens will flood Southern Sudan once Africa’s newest proclaims independence. There was even mention in the Kenya press about modeling future Southern Sudanese education from the Kenyan system. The East African Community (EAC), a regional body whose members have been drawn from nations within East Africa for the purpose of boosting the regions economy with an eye on future confederation, has reserved a space for the newly emerging nation of Southern Sudan.

Final Voting Results

As a final verdict, global media reported that voting results exceeded international expectations. After decades of armed struggle, the new nation of Southern Sudan is now ready to embrace the international community of nations. And as its people rejoice in adulation and collectively celebrate with melodious applause, the type of political culture and mode of administration to be charted by the nation's technocrats will determine its future. For now, the nation's leadership is in the hands of Salva Kiir, doyen of political and armed struggle. Presumably, the way forward for a region like southern Sudan that has been devastated by military incursions, carpet bombings, inter-clan rivalry, disease and malnutrition, drought and locust invasions, is to embrace liberal democracy. Respect for the rule of law, educating ordinary citizens as a means to combating illiteracy, enhancing the foundations of the economy through aggressive agriculture, land consolidation and soil conservation, advancing political deliberations for the attainment of political maturity, inviting credible foreign investors, exploiting potential natural resources, and equitable distribution of the nation's wealth should be the foremost priority.

The writer is a frequent contributor to www.wardheernews.com. He can be reached at adan.makina@gmail.com

---

References

[1] Gaafar al-Nimeiry, “a Sudan Leader with Shifting Politics, Dies at 79” by Dennis Hevesi, New York Times (June 11, 2009),  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/world/africa/12nimeiry.html

[2] Amir H. Idris (2005), Conflict and politics of identity in Sudan,

Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

[3] Sarkesian, Sam C. and Williams John A. and Cimbala, Stephen J. (2008), U.S. National Security: Policymakers, Processes, and Politics, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. Boulder, Colorado.

[4] United Nations Mission in the Sudan, http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/unmis/background.shtml

[5] Pease, Kelly-Kate S. (2008), International Organizations: Perspectives on Governance in the Twenty-First Century (3^rd Ed.), Upper Saddle River, In., New Jersey