A challenging year ahead? Reconciling ‘Oil Thief’ and ‘Enemy State’
Since South Sudanese independence in 2011, peace talks in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa have edged forward without substantial breakthrough in the light of ongoing border skirmishes and the oil freeze. South Sudanese President Salva Kiir and his Sudanese counterpart Omar Bashir recently failed to reach major agreement, frustrating citizens in both countries.
The deep-seated incomprehension could be predicted from the outset, given the two region’s decades of conflict and civil war.
A painting on a wall in Khartoum, July 5, 2012, of Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir and South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir Mayardit, both defaced.
Last year, the headlines become monotonous: Khartoum planes bomb inside South Sudan”, Six people killed in Sudan air-raids”, Clashes at the Border Region”. Meanwhile phrases like Joint demilitarised zone”‚ buffer zone”,Mile 14”, Heglig, Abyei”, dominate reports, referring to the disputed border between the two nations.
Ruling parties’ rhetoric still talks of aiming for peace. But criticisms have raged from both sides. The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), South Sudan’s ruling party, has accused Sudan’s ruling National Congress Party (NCP) of arming militias to destabilise the newborn nation. On the contrary the NCP accuses the SPLM of instigating conflict in Southern Blue Nile and South Kordofan (Nuba Mountains) through what it calls its former northern sector, now the SPLM-North.
‘Oil Thief’ vs ‘Enemy State’
South Sudan’s abrupt oil flow shutdown in January 2012 is at the crux of the conflict. The loss of oil money, following a spat over Sudan allegedly stealing oil to compensate for payment for the South using its infrastructure, sparked economic and political crises. With secession, Sudan lost over seventy-five percent of oil to South Sudan. Cost of living, meanwhile, increased roughly threefold.
Protests in Khartoum, June 29, 2012.
Austerity measures were enforced, despite popular resistance, particularly in Sudan. What some initially dubbed as nascent Arab Spring” protests kicked off in Khartoum, only to be halted by the Sudanese security forces.
Early last year, Sudan’s national assembly called its southern neighbour an Enemy State,” marking a further deterioration in relations between the two parties.
Brokering a deal between such hostile neighbours is a difficult task. The African Union High Implementation Panel (AUHIP) has struggled to design compromise packages. At times, threats of international sanctions on both countries drew the parties back to the negotiating table. But striking a lasting deal has been a hard nut to crack.
A landmark agreement on oil was struck this August at the African Union Summit in Addis Ababa, setting the terms for three and a half years with the fee for oil transportation thought to have been agreed at US$ 9.48 per barrel. Juba also agreed to paying a one-off payment of around US$ 3 billion to Khartoum as compensation for its loss of 75 percent of its oil resources with separation. This didn’t sit well with all South Sudanese politicians: South Sudan’s Vice-President Riek Machar argued that it would make South Sudan the biggest donor on earth to a single country”.
SPLM-DC leader Lam Akol told the Sudan Tribune his take on the spat between the two countries. The fundamental problem with the talks in Addis Ababa is that they are between two parties rather than between the two countries. Both parties have openly said that they would want to effect a regime change in the other,” he said. No talks could succeed in such an atmosphere.”
But, with South Sudan teetering on the brink of economic disaster, the renewed oil flow is essential, pressuring politicians to return to negotiations, regardless of the steep division between the two parties.
Abyei referendum
No clause or provision of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) has been more troubling than the fate of the Abyei area. The two parties have tried to resolve stalemate on other contentious items, but never has any discussion on Abyei issue achieved any success. Six years down the line, a referendum on whether Abyei would join South Sudan or Sudan was planned to accompany the South Sudanese referendum on independence. Violence prevented it from taking place -- and fomented an atmosphere of revenge and hate.
Border security
SPLA accuses Sudan’s army of renewed bombing in Northern Bahr el-Ghazal The United Nations confirmed several times that bombs have been dropped into South Sudan since independence. This excludes the battle for Heglig in April 2012 where Sudanese warplanes roamed Unity and Upper Nile states, bombing civilian targets. Besides, even during the talks in Addis Ababa, the Sudanese army carried out two air raids in Northern Bahr El-Ghazal State, killing over nine civilians at Warpac and Warlang. Bordering states of Western Bahr El-Ghazal, Upper Nile, Unity and Warrap have also witnessed indiscriminate bombings.
The CPA was elaborate on the border status as demarcated by Britain (the colonial master) on January 1, 1956, but efforts of the technical experts to draw the border were dashed. However, whether a new deal would be more comprehensive than the CPA is a matter of doubt. The international community remains a linchpin for resolving the border dispute.
Two viable states?
All these trends indicate the pitfalls facing South Sudan and Sudan in 2013. Alongside the economic noose around their necks. Meanwhile, the United Nations Security Council has voluntarily unleashed imposing non-military sanctions on both countries should they fail to implement the cooperation agreements. International pressure on the two parties is mounting.
The relationship between the two parties is quite a complex one. But can a deal be reached between an ‘Oil Thief’ and an ‘Enemy State’?
