Sudan Country Profile
North-South
Darfur
North-South Conflict History
Sudan has been embroiled in violent conflicts since the country gained independence on January 1, 1956. Two civil wars have ravaged the country; the first civil war lasted from 1955 through 1972 and the second from 1983 through 2005. The United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations estimates that during the past two decades, “Over two million people have died, four million have been uprooted and some 600,000 people have fled the country as refugees.” (“Sudan—UNMIS—Background,” United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations, February 7, 2006.)
During both civil wars, northern Sudanese people who desire an Islamic, unified state fought southern Sudanese people who desire a secular, federal state. Control of resources, particularly oil deposits discovered in the south in 1979, has also been a significant point of contention between the Sudanese government and the southern rebel groups in the civil wars. The issues surrounding control of resources have been complicated by the involvement of international stakeholders pursuing their own geopolitical interests in Sudan.
The Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD), an African regional development organization, established itself as a mediator between the parties in 1993, but it was not until 2002 that the central Sudanese government in Khartoum, led by Omar al-Bashir, and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) committed themselves to a peace process:
“On 20 July, 2002, the parties to the conflict signed the Machakos Protocol, in which they reached specific agreement on a broad framework, setting forth the principles of governance, the transitional process and the structures of government as well as on the right to self-determination for the people of South Sudan, and on state and religion. They agreed to continue talks on the outstanding issues of power sharing, wealth sharing, human rights and a cease-fire. (“Sudan—UNMIS—Background,” United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations, February 7, 2006.)
IGAD, along with the continued work of many other actors, facilitated the peace process. The Sudanese government in Khartoum and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLA/M) signed the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) on January 9, 2005 that brought to a close the second civil war in Sudan. The CPA is working to incorporate the SPLA/M into the Government of National Unity (GNU), yet is strained by ongoing challenges related to limited capacities and lack of political will. (International Crisis Group.)
International Role
The United Nations has played a significant role in the peace process in Sudan as an actor in the mediation process since 1997 and as a presence on the ground since 2004. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Mohamed Sahnoun to be his Special Adviser on Africa on December 19, 1997. As part of his responsibilities, Sahnoun was the UN representative to IGAD summit meetings and other regional events and served as a resource person to all parties of the peace process.
On June 11, 2004, at the request of the Secretary-General, the United Nations Security Council passed resolution 1547 to establish the United Nations Advance Mission in the Sudan (UNAMIS). UNAMIS was a special political mission created “to facilitate contacts with the parties concerned and to prepare for the introduction of an envisaged peace support operation.” (International Crisis Group.)
The role of the United Nations in Sudan changed after the signing of the CPA in 2005. The Agreement contained a provision to establish and operationalize international monitoring mechanisms in southern Sudan to ensure the parties carried out their arranged commitments. The Secretary-General and the Security Council supported the creation of an international monitoring mechanism for southern Sudan. On January 31, 2005 the Secretary-General announced that he would appoint Jan Pronk as the Special Representative of the Secretary-General to the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS). On March 24, 2005, the Security Council passed resolution 1590 to formally launch UNMIS. UNMIS received an initial mandate of six months under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, and this mandate has since been renewed.
Central Issues
The CPA created a framework that has thus far held together peace in southern Sudan, but the situation remains fragile. Ongoing challenges that threaten to destabilize the CPA include the death of SPLM/A leader John Garang and the new government of Southern Sudan leadership, clashes between different tribes in southern Sudan, and the presence of armed groups such as the northern Uganda-based Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). South Sudanese Vice President Riek Machar is currently chairing peace talks between the government of Uganda and the LRA; if successful, these talks will hopefully lead to greater stability in Southern Sudan.
There are two main mechanisms supporting peace in southern Sudan. The first is the international presence on the ground through UNMIS. Deployment of this mission has been a challenge due to the scale of the mission, difficult terrain and outbreaks of violence. The UN Security Council passed resolution 1706 on August 31, 2006, expanding the mandate of UNMIS to include Darfur. Although the Security Council has not yet received consent from the government of Sudan, if there is a change in mandate for UNMIS, it will likely have significant impact on UN peacekeeping presence in South Sudan.
The second mechanism supporting peace in southern Sudan is the provision within the CPA for a referendum in southern Sudan. The referendum is to take place six and a half years from the date the Peace Agreement was signed, and voters will decide to remain unified with northern Sudan or to secede. The outcome of such a referendum would have a significant impact on peace in Sudan and in the Great Lakes region of Africa.
Further Resources
Darfur Conflict History
A violent clash between the central government in Khartoum and various armed groups in Sudan’s western region of Darfur began in 2003 and continues today. Key issues that sparked the violence in Darfur include the underdevelopment and marginalization of the region, the distribution of economic resources, and the failure of the government to provide security. Although the conflict in Darfur is not directly related to the North-South conflict in Sudan, the rebel groups in both are accusing Khartoum of favoring the ruling Arab elite.
There are many parties to the armed conflict in Darfur. The two most prominent armed opposition groups to the government of Sudan are the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), but both groups contain several factions. Khartoum deployed some troops in Darfur to quell the uprisings in Darfur, but the region was further destabilized as the government-supported Janjaweed militia, or “guns on horseback,” began carrying out policies of ethnic cleansing towards the civilian African populations.
Significant humanitarian concerns for the civilian population in Darfur stem from the human rights abuses committed by various parties to the conflict, but most especially from the brutal tactics employed by Janjaweed. On May 7, 2004 the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights published a report that concluded:
“[T]he mission identified disturbing patterns of massive human rights violations in Darfur perpetrated by the Government of Sudan and its proxy militia, many of which may constitute war crimes and/or crimes against humanity. According to information collected, it is clear that there is a reign of terror in Darfur.”(“Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights: Situation of Human Rights in the Darfur Region of the Sudan,” Commission on Human Rights, May 7, 2004.)
The report did not find that Khartoum was pursuing a genocidal campaign in Darfur, although the High Commissioner for Human Rights noted that there was an ethnic aspect to the conflict. The Janjaweed forces are composed mostly of Arab Sudanese and are attacking black-African Darfurians. Rebel forces were found to have violated human rights and humanitarian law, but not on the same scale as those committed by the government of Sudan and the Janjaweed.
When the parties to the conflict declared a ceasefire in April 2004, the African Union sent its first peacekeeping operation, the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS), to monitor the ceasefire agreements. All of the parties have violated the ceasefire agreements since the establishment of AMIS, and violence against civilians in the region has continued relentlessly.
International Role
The international community has shown deep concern for the humanitarian crisis in Darfur, but adequate response to alleviate the suffering continues to elude policymakers at all levels. The United Nations Security Council has supported the African Union’s peace initiatives in the region, including the AU-led peace negotiations known as the Abuja talks, in various resolutions.
In resolution 1556 of July 30, 2004, the Security Council endorsed the deployment of the AU mission (AMIS) and international monitors in Darfur. The resolution urged the international community to assist AMIS and established an arms embargo in Darfur.
With concerns about the humanitarian situation in Darfur growing in late 2004, the Security Council passed resolution 1564 on September 18. In this resolution, a request was made to the United Nations Secretary-General to establish a Commission of Inquiry for assessing the reported violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, determine whether acts of genocide had taken place, and to hold perpetrators of such crimes accountable.
The Secretary-General convened the Commission of Inquiry on October 7, 2004. The Commission submitted its report to the Secretary-General in January 2005. The report found that grave crimes against humanity and war crimes had been committed in Darfur, but genocide had not occurred. The report stressed that crimes against humanity and war crimes could be as serious and heinous as acts of genocide. Finally, Commission of Inquiry recommended that the UN Security Council refer Darfur to the International Criminal Court (ICC).
On March 31, 2005, the Security Council carried out the recommendation of referral of Darfur to the ICC in resolution 1593, and the ICC announced in June that it would investigate crimes committed in Darfur. The Security Council action in March 2005 also included the establishment of a sanctions committee to identify individuals who violated arms embargo in Darfur and who committed abuses in the region. In resolution 1672 of April 2006, the Security Council announced sanctions against four individuals of different parties to the conflict in Darfur.
In addition to passing resolutions, the Security Council has also issued presidential statements in order to put pressure on the armed parties in Darfur. For example, the presidential statement of April 25, 2006 supported the AU demand that the parties sign a peace agreement by April 30, 2006. The international community has been involved in Darfur using a variety of means in an attempt to end the armed conflict and improve the humanitarian crisis in the region.
Continuing Issues
Peace Negotiations
The central government in Khartoum and the faction of the SLA led by Minni Minawi signed the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) in Abuja on May 5, 2006; however, it remains unclear whether the DPA will be implemented successfully. One significant obstacle to success may be the refusal of the Abdulwahid Al Nour-led faction of the SLA and the JEM to sign the peace agreement.
Transition to International Presence in Darfur
The African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) is the first peacekeeping operation organized and carried out by the AU. AMIS has struggled to make an impact, hampered by lack of resources, the complexity of the conflict, regional and international political wrangling, and slow progress in Abuja on the political negotiations.
Negotiations have been underway throughout 2006 to “re-hat,” or transition, from AMIS to a United Nations mission. On March 10, 2006, the African Union Peace and Security Council (PSC) indicated that negotiations over an AU/UN coordinated mission in Darfur may be possible. The PSC issued a communiqué stating that the Council, “Expresses its support, in principle, to a transition from AMIS to a UN operation, within the framework of the partnership between the AU and the United Nations in the promotion of peace, security and stability in Africa.”
On August 31, 2006, the UN Security Council passed resolution 1706 to expand the mandate of UNMIS to include Darfur. The UN deployment's main objective outlined in this resolution is to support the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement. Although the Government of Sudan continues to oppose an outside peacekeeping force in Darfur, it has expressed support, in principle, towards a hybrid AU/UN peacekeeping force. The AU, UN and the Government of Sudan are currently negotiating the technicalities and logistics of such a force.
Sanctions
The United Nations Security Council established a Sanctions Committee to identify individuals and entities who violated the arms embargo and committed abuses in Darfur, yet differences of opinion on sanctions continue to divide Council members.
Further Resources
-
United Nations
- Civil Society Organizations
|
Email this page
