Fighting in South Sudan between the South Sudanese army (SPLA) and rebel forces loyal to General Athor resulted in 70 casualties, according to the SPLA. The fighting, which took place on Thursday the 18th and Friday the 19th of March, occured in Unity, Upper Nile and Jonglei States in the North Eastern part of South Sudan. A spokesman for the SPLA said 36 rebels and 34 SPLA soldiers had been killed.
General Athor fought with the SPLA during the struggle for independence, but rebelled last year after losing a governatorial election in Jonglei state. These clashes are concerning for two main reasons, the challenge they pose to a critically underdeveloped state-to-be and the implication of Northern involvement in the latest round of violence.
South Sudan is preparing for independence from the North, with official seperation planned to take place on the 9th of July. Althoug rich in natural resources the region has suffered as a result of decades of civil war and chronic underdevelopment. Governance structures throughout the new state are weak, and a rebellion presents a real challenge to a South Sudanese government struggling to assert its authority in a state with limited infrastructure. Despite being the size of France, South Sudan has only 4000 kilometers of roads.
One of the concerns regarding the separation of the North and the South is the ability of South Sudan to form a viable state. The persistance of General Athor's rebellion, and the fact that it seems to be growing in popularity rather than diminishing a year after it began, both indicate that central government in South Sudan is not sufficently advanced to maintain control over swathes of its territory.
General Athor claims that he lost the election, which he contested as an independent, as a result of unfair electoral practices. That this is the justification for the rebellion is concerning for two reasons. First, the allegation that the elections are being rigged is a damaging one that undermines confidence in the ruling SPLA government. Although Athor's claims are contested, raising the question undercuts the credibility of the SPLA, credibility it desperately needs to assert its authority over South Sudan. Secondly, the precedent set is dangerous. If recourse to violence is seen as a valid way to achieve political power in South Sudan, fears of a descent into anarchy in the region could become a reality. Although a ceafire was signed between the government and rebels in January, this broke down in February. This year hundreds have been killed as a result of clashes between the two sides.
The second source of concern is allegations of Northern invovlement. Following attacks by Athor's forces on the town of Malakal the SPLA government suspended talks with the Northern government about the upcoming separation, accusing the North of arming rebels in the South. The SPLA government has specifically identified arms used by a rebel militia led by a man called Oliny, as originating in the North. President Bashir's government denies these claims, and the President has publicly accepted the secession of the South from the North.
One of the concerns during the run up to the referendum on secession was that the North would be loath to see the oil-rich South secede. The South alleges that the North is attempting to destabilise as it apporaches independence, perhaps with a view to ultimately regaining control over the South . The resources of the South certainly present as incentive for Northern interfence. The last thing a new state needs is an interfering neighbour exacerbating its weaknesses.
These concerns are serious and would be destabilising for any country, the real problem in South Sudan is that they add to a long list of developmental concerns the state alredy had to contend with. It is tempting to conclude that an avaricous North is to blame for this problem, but the solution to the problem seems to lie with strengthening the South Sudanese government rather than railing against the North. However, like many problems in the new state, the solution is much easier to propose than to execute.
No comments:
Post a Comment