By Henry Srebrnik, [Charlottetown, PEI] Guardian
Civil war erupted in South Sudan in December
2013 after President Salva Kiir, an ethnic Dinka, accused his
former deputy, Riek Machar, an ethnic Neur, of fomenting a coup.
The violence immediately took on an ethnic
character. Soldiers from the Dinka ethnic group, one of the two
largest ethnic groups in South Sudan, aligned with President
Kiir and those from the Nuer ethnic group, the other largest
ethnic group, supported Machar.
At the time the country was only two years
old, having finally liberated itself from rule by the Sudanese
regime in Khartoum after decades of warfare.
Since then, well over 50,000 people have died
in the conflict, more than two million have fled to neighbouring
countries and almost two million more are internally displaced,
despite the presence of 17,000 UN peacekeepers in the country.
Armed groups have targeted civilians along
ethnic lines, committed rape and sexual violence, destroyed
property and looted villages, and recruited children into their
ranks.
Under the threat of international sanctions
and following several rounds of negotiations Kiir had signed a
peace agreement with Machar in August 2015 and the latter
returned to the capital, Juba, in April 2016 after spending more
than two years outside of the country.
But soon after his return, violence broke out
again between government forces and opposition factions and
Machar again fled the country.
The
Sudanese parties to the war signed another cease-fire deal in
December 2017 but have not honored their commitment to end
violence. In the latest example, the country’s
military forces captured the rebel-held town of Lasu.
Adama
Dieng, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ special adviser
for the prevention of genocide, has intensified the call for
an end to violence in South Sudan, following sustained
diplomatic pressure from the African Union on South Sudanese
leaders.
Both the government and rebels have done very
little to discipline individuals committing atrocities in the
four-year conflict in South Sudan, he indicated, adding that the
country is suffering from what he called the “total impunity of
armed men who have embraced sexual violence as a systematic
weapon of war.”
Diplomats believe real pressure for a deal to
be implemented must come from neighboring states. Instead, Dieng
remarked, Uganda and
Kenya are contributing to the conflict.
He
said large quantities of weapons and ammunition are flowing
into South Sudan through those countries. “International
partners have to start targeting the accomplices,
intermediaries of the South Sudanese parties.”
Yet Uganda, which sent troops to fight on the
side of the government of South Sudan in the early stages of the
war, is still feeding the conflict with weapons, according to
Richard Downie, deputy director of the Africa program at the
Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington,
who visited the region in January.
That’s because there are multiple and
longstanding ties between Uganda and South Sudan. Since colonial
times and the establishment of central governments, the two
territories have shared a long border, traversing the home areas
of several ethnic groups.
Uganda’s President Yoveri Museveni and his
National Resistance Movement had close ties with the Sudan
People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A), the guerilla group
that won independence for South Sudan and is now the country’s
army. Kiir had become its commander in 2005.
The SPLM/A was allowed to operate inside
Uganda, where hundreds of thousands of South Sudanese lived in
refugee camps. The links are clearly deep.
So the barbarities continue. Investigators
from the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan have
reported that more than 40 senior military officers and
officials, including three state governors, should be prosecuted
on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment