Mennonite Central Committee

Reflections on Hope for a Just and Lasting Peace in Southern Sudan

Rob and Mary Haarsager, MCC Sudan
February 2007

We have served with MCC Sudan for three different terms: two years in the mid-80s in Juba during the early years of the civil war; four years in the mid-90s, based in Nairobi but traveling widely throughout southern Sudan with New Sudan Council of Churches; and our current term as Co-Country Representatives, first based in Nairobi and now in Juba, the capital of southern Sudan. So we have experienced Sudan (at least the South) through many difficult, often hopeless years.

The signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement has brought a new sense of hope to the people of Sudan – not just in the South but for most Sudanese who tired of the long war and how it affected their country and their daily lives. Why do they have reason to hope and what do they hope for? What might happen that will remove that feeling of hope and return it to one of despair?

One reason that Sudanese have hope is that the CPA is largely seen as an agreement that is just and fairly addresses (among others) three major reasons why the war was fought. First, it addresses the hope and desire of southern Sudanese for self-determination by agreeing to hold a referendum on unity or secession in 2011. Second, the CPA addresses the hope for self-governance by providing for a semi-autonomous government of southern Sudan. Lastly, the agreement addresses the hope to develop the South by agreeing on a formula to share oil revenues and other revenue streams, thus ensuring that revenue “earned” by resources in the South would stay in and benefit the South.

Another reason for hope is that the involvement of regional and international governments in brokering the peace agreement and their continued involvement in monitoring it helps to ensure the accountability of both the National Congress Party and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement to honor the provisions of the CPA. One of the major lessons learned from the 1972 accord, ending the first civil war, was that as much regional and international involvement was needed after the agreement was signed as before. That didn’t happen in 1972, but there is hope now that the major political and military actors will be held accountable in part because of the presence of international monitoring and peacekeeping forces, government missions, NGOs and media outlets.

A third reason why the average Sudanese has hope in the success of the CPA is that the SPLM maintained unity following the death of its Chairman, co-founder and national leader Dr. John Garang de Mabior, only a few months after the signing of the CPA. His tragic death could have brought on a power struggle that precipitated a collapse of both the Movement and the fledgling new Government of southern Sudan. Instead there was an orderly transition of leadership and pledges by all to stay to the course and vision of Dr. Garang.

All of the reasons for hope in the CPA (there are more, of course) have a flip side which could easily contribute to its collapse, with the resumption of war an all too easy alternative. Unfortunately, since the CPA was signed over two years ago, we find troubling indicators appearing.

One of the most troubling signs is that the Darfur conflict continues unabated. The civil war in the South and Darfur are linked because of the basic reasons for each conflict’s beginning. These reasons are that the powers that be in Sudan have historically marginalized outer regions from sharing significant political power and development and have used traditional ethnic/tribal rivalries to destabilize the regions and bring disunity to opposition groups. The fact that the Darfur war continues indicates to the average person that the President, Omar el Beshir, and those who support him, signed the CPA for reasons known to them but are not serious about fully implementing the CPA.

Another significant troubling sign is that while the average Sudanese is overjoyed that peace has come to southern Sudan he or she also wants to experience a tangible “dividend” of peace. Obviously not having war is a huge dividend. But the large landscape of southern Sudan is still largely unserved by roads, schools, health facilities and safe water sources.

International governments made pledges of $40 billion USD at a donor conference for Sudan in April 2005, but only a small part of that has been realized. Yes, there is a large international peacekeeping and monitoring presence in southern Sudan, with diplomatic missions opening and large numbers of UN agencies and international NGOs operating programs. The average person wonders what these agencies are doing. There is a perception that for the last two years they have had a largely internal focus – ensuring that they have air conditioned housing for their staff, new cars to drive and the best equipped offices – while accomplishing very little in terms of delivering services.

The new Government of southern Sudan, state and local governments are starting from scratch and have a tremendous job to accomplish with little capacity and relatively few resources. Reports of corruption have been raised and people wonder where the oil revenue money goes, since they’re not seeing roads, schools or health centers being built.

The fact is that people want to see progress, and they haven’t seen much for the last two years. All of these perceptions, real or not, are helping to erode the sense of hope for the southern Sudanese.

Yes, we as MCC workers in Sudan see troubling signs but overall the signs of hope still outweigh the signs of despair. For us the bottom line is that the most significant reason for hope is that many of the people of southern Sudan put their faith and trust in God. We feel strongly that the same faith that sustained them during 23 years of war will keep the hope for a just and lasting peace burning.

Rob and Mary Haarsager have served with MCC Sudan for three different terms: two years in the mid-80s; four years in the mid-90s; and, at the time this article was written, as MCC Sudan Co-Country Representatives.