South Sudan Faces Challenges Ahead of Independence
By Staff Writer
JUBA—Even as South Sudan prepares for its independence in July following a successful self-determination referendum, long-suppressed grievances and simmering political disputes have re-surfaced, threatening instability on the eve of independence. In its latest report, Politics and Transition in the New South Sudan the International Crisis Group cautions that unless there is an opening of political space and a participatory transition, the soon to be independent government risks recreating the kind of centralised, authoritarian and ultimately unstable state it finally managed to escape.
The ruling Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) cobbled together an important, though tentative, Southern consensus ahead of the January 2011 referendum. But its choke-hold on power and a “winner-takes-all” approach to the transition have since jeopardised those gains. Meanwhile, armed insurgencies, militia activity and army defections highlight internal fault lines and latent grievances within the security sector.
“A politics of exclusion threatens further polarisation of ethnic communities and their political leaders”, says Zach Vertin, Crisis Group Sudan Analyst. “The nascent state can ill-afford further antagonism, particularly when the challenges in realising independence and managing domestic security concerns make Southern unity all the more important”.
Crisis Group says that the SPLM should recognise that meaningful opposition participation is not a threat to, but an investment in, stability and legitimate rule. Opposition parties share responsibility for pursuing common national interests, shouldering national responsibilities and developing a robust multi-party system. International partners must re-calibrate relations with the government to reflect new political realities, including the need to cultivate greater democratic space within and beyond the ruling party, in the wake of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) - the treaty that ended the two decades of civil war in 2005 and that concludes in July, concurrent with Southern independence.
“The liberation struggle is over, and the CPA era is coming to a close; the SPLM must mark a new chapter in its own evolution if it is to maintain cohesion and deliver in government. Party reforms should aim to manage internal divisions, erode a top-down military culture, professionalise operations and trade coercion for enhanced internal dialogue”, the report says.
Once independent, a series of governance issues - most notably sound management of oil resources and a more tangible commitment to decentralisation - will shape the political and economic structure of the emerging state and help manage sky-high post-independence expectations. Each can be a vehicle for empowering state and local politics and accelerating development in the new South.
“The months ahead present a considerable opportunity, but it comes amid enormous challenges”, says Ernst Jan Hogendoorn, Crisis Group Horn of Africa Project Director. “Failing to start on the right foot could undermine progress already achieved in the South and contaminate the institutions and institutional values in Africa’s youngest state”.
According to the report, two factors may shape the coming transition period more than any other; first, the degree to which the South’s ruling Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) allows an opening of political space in which a vibrant multi-party system can grow; secondly, the will to undertake democratic reform within the SPLM, as intra-party politics continue to dominate the political arena in the near term. Embracing pluralism now – both inside and outside the party – would lay a foundation for stability in the long term. Failing on either front would risk recreating the kind of overly centralised, authoritarian and ultimately unstable state South Sudan has finally managed to escape.
Post-referendum negotiations continue between the SPLM and the National Congress Party (NCP) toward a peaceful separation and a constructive North-South relationship. While they consume considerable attention of the SPLM leadership, the political landscape in South Sudan has begun to transform. From the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005, South Sudan’s divergent ethnic and political communities were united behind a common goal: self-determination. Many suppressed grievances, choosing not to rock the boat until that objective was achieved. Now that the vote has been cast and its results endorsed, the common denominator is gone, and long-simmering political disputes are beginning to re-surface. Likewise, a series of armed insurgencies, recent militia activity, and army defections highlight internal fault lines and latent grievances within the security sector. Continued fighting has challenged government capacity to manage domestic conflict, risks further polarisation of ethnic communities and their political leaders and could stoke broader insecurity.
The report says that jockeying has intensified between the SPLM and Southern opposition parties over the composition and powers of a transitional government and duration of the transitional period. The SPLM desires to move expeditiously toward a transitional constitution amid all that must be done before independence, while the opposition fears it is manipulating the process to entrench its power. A domineering approach from the SPLM has jeopardised the goodwill created by an important political parties’ conference in late 2010. Stifling debate and poor political management of such processes unnecessarily risk further antagonism among opposition parties, particularly at a time when the challenges in realising independence and managing domestic security concerns make Southern unity all the more important.
“The SPLM must recognise that meaningful opposition participation – including in defining the transition and in a broad-based government – is not a threat to its power but an investment in stability and legitimate rule. A politics of exclusion may in the long run undermine the very power some party hardliners are trying to consolidate”, the report says.
Managing South Sudan’s ethno-regional diversity will continue to be a tall order. Political accommodation is a necessity regardless of what form the transitional government assumes. The SPLM leadership will have a difficult chessboard to manage, finding roles for a wide range of party (including many members now returning home), army and opposition elements. It must avoid a “winner-takes-all” mindset and view the appointment of a broadly representative government not as appeasement alone but as recognition of Southern Sudan’s pluralist character.
Meanwhile, there is no denying that Southern opposition parties are weak; their resources, membership and structures are thin. While the SPLM must engender a conducive environment, opposition parties are equally responsible for pursuing shared national interests, shouldering national responsibilities and developing credible alternative platforms that target a national constituency. Continued national and international support for political party development is essential.
Fair or not, the soon-to-be independent Republic of South Sudan will for some time be judged in the context of its decision to separate. One-party rule, tribal-oriented politics or significant governance or internal security failures would generate criticism from sceptics who argued the region could not govern itself. The opportunity now presents itself to prove them wrong; it is up to the South Sudanese to take it.