Paul KeenanThe Church is trying to broker a new peace, writes Paul Keenan
It is hard to see what South Sudan had to celebrate on July 9. On the fourth anniversary of independence from the greater Sudan, workers in the capital Juba and beyond were granted the usual day of rest in which to mark the auspicious date. Many may have purchased food and beverages for the day utilising the newly-adopted coinage of the state, available as 10, 20 and 50 piasters and one and two pound denominations, clear evidence of South Sudan’s sovereign status among the world’s nations after so many years of struggle.
And yet, now beset by an entirely new conflict, marked by a barbarity which at times equals that creating headlines for Islamic State, ordinary South Sudanese citizens must wonder at what they have gained by independence.
Today, across nine of the nation’s 10 states, the government forces of President Salva Kiir are reportedly engaged in clashes with a plethora of tribal and rebel groupings disaffected by his rule. In places, said rebels are further driven by the aim of controlling the country’s lucrative oil wells, which in another vision, should have been the key to South Sudan’s post-independence success. Instead, the reality is one of 10,000 killed since 2013, with 1.6 million displaced, some 850,000 of that number fleeing beyond Sudanese borders.
Civil conflict
The current civil conflict is a fresh tragedy for a region which has struggled since at least 1955 to become a distinct region from the majority Muslim-Arab north. In that year, as independence from joint British-Egyptian rule for the whole of the north and south loomed, the first clashes for an autonomous south began.
Conflict continued until 1971 with the granting of the much desired self-control of the Southern Sudan Autonomous Region, only for peace to be sundered in 1983 as the measures were reversed. The renewed fighting claimed at least one million lives, and four million displaced, before the onset of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005, an accord which guaranteed a referendum on southern secession towards silencing the guns once and for all.
When that vote subsequently carried in January of 2011, with full independence on July 9 that same year, it seemed, not least to the returning refugees, as though all had been gained.
The short-lived peace was ultimately killed at the highest level in the fledgling state. In 2013, President Salva Kiir accused 10 members of his administration and the military of plotting a coup against him, his Vice President Riek Machar among the number.
Despite denials, charges of treason were brought and the vice president dismissed. Cue a raft of claims and counter claims, with suspicions of overthrow matched by accusations of a power-grab by a new generation of African leaders (the South Sudanese parliament this year approved a constitutional amendment to extend the term of the president and other officials for three years beyond Independence Day 2015 and cancelled elections – blaming the fighting for this).
Into the volatile mix was added rural/tribal disaffection at a perceived Juba-centric development drive and the battle lines were quickly drawn, breaking out into all out civil war as Mr Machar became head of his own rebel group to counter Mr Kiir.
Some 18 months into the conflict, neither man is backing down as South Sudanese continue to die and suffer what the Obama administration has denounced as “appalling crimes”.
Many of these crimes have begun to gain a greater share of media headlines in recent weeks as reports from the country highlight the actions of the official Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) in its drive against rebels. Unsettling dispatches speak of torture and summary execution; stories of rape have been accompanied by accusations that victims are afterwards barricaded into their homes which are then set alight, all as a means of punishing those who allegedly harbour or cover for rebels.
Meanwhile, parallel reports of the fate awaiting refugees seeking shelter in camps run by the United Nations’ Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) are no less disturbing: gun battles within the camps between rival ethnic groups; kidnap, rape, murder.
Aid to the Church in Need has quoted voices from those enduring the conflict in the Unity and Upper Nile states: “We experienced war in the past, but the cruelty that we are experiencing today is without equal. It is like living in a nightmare”.
Against this backdrop, the minority Catholic Church in South Sudan moved on Independence Day to call on all sides to enter into mediation at once, offering to act between the warring sides. The message was issued by Archbishop Paulino Lukudu Loro of Juba, who, during a prayer for South Sudan on its national day, captured the true mood in describing the event as one of “lamentation and mourning” and not of true celebration.
“Thousands of our people have been killed,” he said. “The party which led us to independence has split into a meaningless power struggle. Our soldiers are now killing one another and killing innocent civilians… we are seeing atrocities against human life and dignity on a scale which we have never seen before. The rule of law is all but getting disappearing. Our youth are being corrupted by revenge and violence.
“Ethnic division is replacing our desire for unity as South Sudanese.”
The message for an end to conflict was one echoed that same day by the United States, in a video message recorded by National Security Advisor Susan Rice who was clear in who the US administration holds accountable for the fighting and abuses.
“President Kiir and Riek Machar and their cronies are personally responsible for this new war and self-inflicted disaster,” she stated. “President Kiir and Riek Machar would rather haggle over personal power and wealth than agree on solutions.”
Words have been matched, after a fashion, by deed with the United Nations’ announcement that it is to impose sanctions on six generals on both sides of the conflict said to be behind the worst excesses of the fighting.
Critics have pointed out that the figures targeted make the sanctions pointless as they have no assets to freeze and are unlikely to fret over travel bans. Analysts suggest, however, that the move is designed as a red flag to Mssrs Kiir and Machar that if they do not rein in their dogs of war and get around the negotiating table, they will be next, and they are in a position to feel the pain of sanctions.
Whether raised voices and UN moves are enough to convince the warring parties to reach out to the Church in its offer of a mediated peace is yet to be seen. The Church itself stands ready, filling in the time in doing what it can to alleviate the suffering of a people who dreamed of far more than camps and unending conflict.