CSW briefing on Sudan

Introduction

Although peace talks in Naivasha, Kenya have been suspended for Ramadan and will probably close down for Christmas also, continued international engagement, and American pressure in particular, have meant that the talks have made steady progress.

Agreement on security

On 25 September there was a breakthrough concerning the security arrangements that will govern the six-year interim period prior to a referendum on self-determination for the south. The September agreement allows for an internationally monitored ceasefire that will come into effect from the date of the signature of a comprehensive peace agreement, and for the continued existence of separate armies during the interim period. Khartoum is required to withdraw 80% of its troops from the south within a two and a half year period once a definitive peace agreement is signed, and a proportional downsizing of forces on both sides will occur at a suitable time following the completion of comprehensive ceasefire arrangements.

The agreement allows for gradual military convergence through the creation of a new force under joint control consisting of an equal number of troops from both sides. This force will gradually be deployed in areas of conflict throughout the country and will form the basis of a national army, should the referendum result in a southern vote for unity. To this end the accord also aims to develop a common military doctrine to help heal rifts between the two sides. The agreement also forbids the use of either army to maintain domestic law and order ‘except in constitutionally specified emergencies’.

The euphoria that greeted this breakthrough initially led to exaggerated expectations that a comprehensive peace agreement was imminent. The most prominent proponent of these sentiments was US Secretary of State Colin Powell, who during his recent visit to Kenya, spoke of a signed peace agreement by the end of the year.

Several Sudan observers have questioned whether the Secretary of State’s optimism arose out of a genuine appraisal of the progress of the peace talks, or whether it was in part an attempt to accelerate the signing of a peace treaty for the purposes of exhibiting an international success to an increasingly restive US domestic audience. The periodical Africa Confidential recently received a report that appears to indicate that Washington is eager for a foreign policy success in the run up to the electoral year, and in the aftermath of interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, which continue to defy closure. In mid October a US official is said to have indicated that the Administration was keen to rid itself of the image of being a government that ‘shoots from the hip’ and to have insisted: ‘we need an agreement’. It would be unfortunate, however, after painstaking diplomacy has gained such ground and is set to gain more, if US electoral considerations were to begin to gain greater prominence in the minds of external negotiators than securing an effective peace. It is vital that negotiators do not allow timetables that have more to do with domestic considerations than with securing a viable future for the longsuffering people of Sudan to dictate the course of events. The people of Sudan require and deserve a just peace that will last, not a hurried, imperfect agreement concluded on the basis of short-term international diplomatic agendas.

Whilst expressing pleasure at the breakthrough, southern Sudanese, who have experienced numerous false dawns, have been slightly more guarded in their pronouncements. As one Sudanese cleric put it ‘we have been disillusioned so many times now… It’s as if we are a 1 ‘Framework Agreement on Security Arrangements During the Interim Period between the Government of Sudan (GOS) and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLM/SPLA)’ 25 September 2003, Naivasha, Kenya 2 ‘Sudan: Peace in Our Time’, Africa Confidential, Vol. 44 No 21, 24 October 2003, p 2 Page 4 few steps from peace and then they turn back and go away, far away. I hope this time they do something serious’. This view is echoed by John Garang de Mabior who, while fully endorsing the peace process, told a journalist that past experiences have taught him to ‘keep expectations modest’.

Download full report (120kB PDF)