South Sudan : A failed state in the making?

By Alasdair McKay, UK Defence Forum Researcher


Those familiar with Sudan's history would find it difficult to dispute the view that 2011 will be one of the most important and pivotal years yet for the nation. The year commenced with a January referendum on whether the South would remain part of the North, as a unified country, or secede and become an independent state. The result of the referendum was a 98.83% vote in favor of South Sudan becoming independent. The Sudanese President, Omar al-Bashir, accepted the referendum result, and the Republic of South Sudan is expected to officially become Africa's 54th state on July 9th 2011. Salva Kiir Mayardi, who is also chairman of the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM), has taken office as the President of South Sudan.

However, beginnings can be very difficult times and South Sudan already risks becoming a failed state. Proxy wars have recently emerged in the South between various rebel groups. The Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) – the military wing of South Sudan's ruling SPLM party – is thought to be at war with at least seven militias in the South. As a consequence of the conflicts, between 800 and 1000 people have been killed this year, with tens of thousands displaced by the various conflicts affecting nine of the South's ten states. The problems have partially emanated from many of the rebel groups believing that Kiir's new government of South Sudan is plotting to stay in power indefinitely, not adequately representing all tribal groups and neglecting development in rural areas of the South.

The conflicts in South Sudan have led many community members to acquire weapons for protection.

Moreover, local authorities in the South are starting to establish their loyalties to ethnic affiliations. Some members of the SPLA seem to feel more allegiance to their tribes than to the people of South Sudan as a whole, and are changing sides when conflicts emerge. It is possible that more and more groups, in certain areas of the South, may see competition for sparse resources and protection of their tribal community as a way of justifying non-commitment to a common South Sudanese national identity and peace. This, in turn, could create an every tribe for itself scenario and an all out civil war.

The area where tensions are perhaps potentially the most dangerous is Abyei – the oil-rich region along the North-South border. In January, Abyei was supposed to take part in a referendum to decide whether it wanted to join South Sudan, which was to have been conducted concurrently with the Southern independence referendum. However, this did not go according to plan. Instead, the National Congress party (NCP), the ruling party in the North, insisted that the Misseriya, semi-nomadic Arabs who graze their cattle in Abyei for a part of the year, should be able to vote in the Abyei referendum. The Ngok Dinka, the principal and permanent residents of Abyei who identify themselves as Southern Sudanese, feared that if the Misseriya were to take part in the referendum, the NCP would simply move a large amount of people who would vote to stay part of the North into the area. This would have most likely seen Abyei remain part of the North, an eventuality not desired by the Ngok Dinka. Tragically, the fears in the region have been expressed through violence. During the January referendum period, skirmishes left more than 100 dead, but the clashes became deadlier. In late April and early May, Misseriya militias attacked police positions occupied by the Southern forces of the Abyei administration. These attacks saw 154 people killed and four villages razed.

The situation in Abyei has not been helped by Omar al-Bashir recent declaration that the region will always be part of the North, and the Khartoum government's deployment of Sudan Armed Forces into the disputed area a week ago. Evidence suggests that Northern troops have now destroyed about one-third of all civilian structures in Abyei's main town. Southern officials say that 80,000 people have been displaced from the region, and the United Nations report that tens of thousands are living out in the open, with little food or fuel.

These events will only increase tensions between North and South. Although it is unlikely that the North and the South will engage in another all out war with each other, history has shown that the North has not been hesitant to use whatever methods are available to hold onto important territory. Despite the Northern government accepting the result of the January referendum, it seems that it will not let the South go easily. The North's past activity has led many to suggest that it could use local proxies and exploit long standing grievances between ethnic groups to destabilize the South. Contested regions like Abyei may prove to be convenient starting points for the North. Elsewhere, there are fears that ethnic conflict could resume between groups in the Nuba Mountains, a region that has been balanced precariously between war and peace throughout its history. The North will be mindful of this potentially volatile situation and may leap at the opportunity to exploit it.

If the internal conflicts in the South escalate, then it would mean an unwelcome continuation of a history of violence for Sudan. Since gaining independence in 1956, Sudan has been characterized by ongoing conflict and tensions, and fluctuations between military and civilian rule. Historic imbalances between the North and the South, in terms of political power and economic distribution, led to the first North-South civil war (1955-1972), followed by the second North-South civil war (1983-2005) and the Darfur crisis which began in 2003. The conduct of these wars was appalling. Campaigns of mass killing, high levels of rape, mutilation, torture, exploitation of child soldiers, human trafficking and slavery became norms in these wars. The conflicts also overflowed the boundaries of Sudan and spilled into neighboring states.

Taking Sudan's troubled recent history into consideration, the implications of the violence in South Sudan erupting are not simply issues between North and South as fighting could further destabilize the surrounding region. This highlights the importance of pacification being achieved. Consequentially, it will be vital that the citizens of South Sudan put their animosity aside in order to unify and determine their own destiny. The South has already made one choice in favor of separation over unity with the January referendum, but it must now make sure that it does not choose separation between its own people ahead of overall Southern unity. The formation of a national identity and unity among the people of South Sudan is not only critical for citizens that seek the path to independence, but it will also affect the possibility of an independent state actually existing.