South Sudan: Group Wants New Mediators in Conflict
By George Okore.
A group of progressive leaders under the banner Friends of South Sudan in East Africa Community (EAC) has appealed to the international community to expeditiously end the on-going violent conflict in South Sudan.
The group - Friends of South Sudan in East Africa (FOSSEA) says continued suffering of South Sudan citizens and want neighboring countries and international community have made to search for lasting peace in the country. The group says under Article 3 (b) of Constitutive Act of African Union (AU), it should defend sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of its member states.
They want AU Member States to appoint new mediators to the conflict in South Sudan that come from outside IGAD region. Furthermore, they want the five AU Adhoc-Committee member states to take charge of the Mediation Process to militate against the vested interests manifested by South Sudan neighbours.
They are calling for review and recast the Proposed Peace Agreement taking into considerations the realities and the voice of the people on the ground in order to achieve lasting peace. This they argue, will be achieved by incorporating ate achievements made under Arusha Re-Unification Agreement.
“As citizens of African Union, in line with Article 4 (g) of the same Act, we call upon the AU to warn its member states to adhere to the principle of non-interference by any member state in internal affairs of another state ” which is evidently the case as far as the IGAD Plus Proposal is concerned,” says chairman Ben Mulwa. Furthermore, he says AU should invoke Article 4 (p) of the Act, on the basis of which it should call upon its member states to observe “condemnation and rejection of unconstitutional change of government” in South Sudan.
The IGAD-Pus ‘Proposed Compromise Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan’ in our opinion, as it is, is a dangerous footing to already salted grounds. “A better-formulated proposal to resolve the conflict needs to be explored, as a matter of urgency. Territorial control divisions, parallel military structures and un-conducive ultimatums are just but some of the greatest threats, by themselves, to the peace the document want to establish,” Mr Mulwa said in Nairobi yesterday.
FOSSEA Secretary General and Convener Weston Wanjohi expresses dissatisfaction with, first, how the IGAD-Plus has handled the peace process and failures in the ‘Proposed Compromise Agreement on the Resolution of the conflict. He says when IGAD assumed mediation into the conflict after the events of December 2013, the world, and more specifically, the South Sudanese, was hopeful that the EAC was united against the violence in South Sudan.
The group notes that growing protests against the ‘Proposed Compromise Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan’ suggest that it is a failure and the people of South Sudan, alongside most of their brothers and sisters from East African Community have realized the dangerous path South Sudan is heading to.
“The unfolding events of the peace process under the leadership of IGAD-Plus portray otherwise. IGAD has shown that it is no longer a neutral entity. That has by itself discredited the process of finding peace in South Sudan. Secondly, IGAD wants the government of South Sudan to delegate its responsibilities of searching for peace in its country to outsiders,” says Mr Wanjohi.
He says IGAD should let the government of South Sudan take lead in the search for peace in its country and more so, take full responsibility in devising ways to end the rebellion in South Sudan. He notes that the ongoing peace process under IGAD has to a larger extent worsened the political situation and fueled further the violent conflict in South Sudan.
The peace process has significantly created observable gaps, especially, in the dialogue between the South Sudan government and the rebels led by RiekMachar. Notably, some IGAD Member States treat the rebel movement leaders with courtesy and allowed them to propagate violent propaganda through the media from their countries. That has given the rebel leaders a reason to justify the lawlessness they have created in South Sudan.
The professionals argue that the rebels have been granted operation command points in the East African region to further destabilize the government of South Sudan. For that, countries like Ethiopia and Kenya must come clean so as not to be accused of indirectly aiding the perpetuation of conflict in South Sudan, since lately, the rebel commanders have been accused of managing the war from Addis Ababa and Nairobi.
They particular stress that Ethiopia and Kenya need to know that instability in South Sudan is majorly influenced by how they handle leadership of rebellion. The other major factor contributing to the intransigence of rebels in South Sudan is support t from Sudan, a Member State of IGAD. Sudan is said to be playing a double game, using the IGAD as a platform to pursue its policy of keeping South Sudan unstable.
The group says IGAD-Plus led peace process has continued to refer to both the government and t rebels as ‘warring’ parties. “That is wrong and betrays the spirit of sovereignty as espoused in the AU Charter. The government of South Sudan is a legitimate entity serving the people of South Sudan. The rebels are just but a dissatisfied group of people, just as there are in many other countries across the world. By that virtue, they are not equals,” says Mr. Mulwa.