Review on Latest Developments in both North and South Sudan: Post-Independence Politics of Oil (Economic War) & Tribal Conflicts that have rocked South Sudan over the last two months. What does it means to both adversaries that need stability with economy and security.
December 1st – 2011 - January 31st 2012: Nyok Achuoth Gor a Transnational Research Officer with STATT has been following recent developments between two adversaries with interest and significant worry one how will this economic wars end.
What does unilateral decisions over oil dispute means to the fragile Post-Independence negotiations between the two Sudans since South Sudan became independence from the rest of Sudan? How will the game of long adversaries’ support to rebels from both sides end?
Below are some of the thoughts that Nyok presents on behalf of STATT that is so committed to share issues of grassroots with the world?
Since the independence of South Sudan from the rest of Sudan, both countries have been engaged in economic cold wars a tit for tat game due to a bitter divorce that both countries had brought about by the CPA signed in 2005. The Northern Sudan has not been making things easy for South do establish itself as a new state coming out from nothing but a war-torn over a period of two decades. Both sides still have lack of trust toward each other due to a long adversary on issues of economic development as one of the item on the menu of civil war.
The latest developments of both countries’ unilateral decision over oil revenues dispute where both sides have been accusing each other since the independence of South Sudan puts the current fragile diplomatic relation and negotiations into a risk of collapse. And since oil has been one of the items that made both sides go to war for such a long time. Oil could still play some significant role for better or bad since both sides depend on oil heavily. Unilateral decision that was made by South Sudan to shut down its oil production because South Sudan government believed that this is a daylight robbing of its own resource by North Sudan. While North Sudan accuses South Sudan for not paying oil transit fees for oil of which there has been no agreement reached over oil dispute since both parties have been heavily involved in the negotiation after the referendum of Southern Sudan.
Therefore, in my view such unilateral decisions could lead the already fragile relation defined by many issues including oil, border demarcation dispute, debts sharing and citizenships among many others between the two sides. Both countries need to constantly engage in negotiation so that a consensus agreement on oil dispute is achieved before things go out of hand which could result into a conflict of which Sudan has been trying to instigate but South Sudan has been unable to militarily respond due to its own strategic move to avoid going back to war with North Sudan.
The current talk being mediated by the African Union High Level Implementation Panel led by former South African President Mbeki has not been really yielding any progress so far simply due to lack of pressure from African Union as a peak body in the continent on both adversaries over an oil dispute. This means much more pressure need to be asserted on both sides in order for them to come to consensus and this would not be really offer by African Union alone but international community’s involvement is highly recommended in that case and this could lead to both sides coming to genuine consensus.
How will the game of long adversaries’ for support to rebels from both sides end?
South Sudan has been rocked by tribal and militias conflict before and after the referendum conduct and independence of South Sudan on July 9th 2011. In the last two months tribal conflicts have been worsening particularly in Jonglei between Murle, Nuer-Lou and Dinka Bor tribal groups which have claimed thousands of innocent lives and left hundreds of thousands of people displaced from their homes that have been destroyed as well. However, the ongoing tribal conflicts are being fuel by cattle rustling with women and children kidnapping practices that raise the question of whether the government of South Sudan is really able to provide security to its own people without giving excuses that Khartoum of arming certain tribes such as Murle through rebel groups based within South Sudan. This kind of excuses could prove what opponents of South Sudanese in Khartoum have been arguing (during the civil war 1983-2005) that South Sudanese people are incapable to manage and deliver security needed to their own civilian which is happening now.
Besides the worrying trend within South Sudan, conflicts have been going on within North Sudan’s Southern Kordofan and Blue states between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and Sudan People Liberation Movement/Army-North (SPLM/A-N) sector since the June 2011 are being blamed on Juba as the supporter of SPLM/A-North against Khartoum. This tit for tat game will continue to put the current fragile relationship into a risky situation and that is not what is really needed at this time between both Sudans. These developments of (conflicts) are likely to continue until both sides are able to settle issues of significant concern such as the oil dispute that tends to surge above the water and that would reduce stretching apart both countries at this time.
Is the proposed Pipeline through Kenya as per the last week signed memo between GoSS and Kenya a viable and alternative solution or will it adversely increase the problem between the North and South Sudan? Is Kenya the best reliable nation that will guarantee a safe route for exporting South's oil to the international market?
The question of proposed pipeline agreement between the government of South Sudan and Kenyan government is also a very important latest development that needs deep analysis because there are challenges too on this proposed pipeline which include the cost to build the pipeline, time frame for its completion and will this strategy be a threatening one to Sudan so that it soften its behaviours toward South Sudan. There is no doubt that this new proposed pipeline will benefit Kenya or any other country that the landlocked South Sudan will build its oil pipeline through and definitely that country will gain transit fees. Hence, this will improve relation between South Sudan and Kenya or any other country that South Sudan will build its pipeline through and government have proposed four alternative routes.
Nonetheless, this development could exacerbate the already fragile relation between the North and South Sudan because North Sudan will definitely lose oil revenue that it would have obtains through the pipeline that has been use to export oil to the international market through Port Sudan.
Is Kenya the best reliable nation that will guarantee a safe route for exporting South's oil to the international market?
On the question whether, is Kenya the best reliable nation that will guarantee a safe route for exporting South Sudan’s oil to the international market? It is not yet clear at this time because my fear is that according to the politics of free market each nation including Kenya always work hard to put their interest first than the interest of South Sudan and who knows whether Kenya or any other country (proposed in South Sudan’s four alternative routes for pipeline) will charge South Sudan with high transit fees as Sudan is now pushing at the ongoing negotiation.
Hence this thinking is provoked by the fact that both Sudans can reach a good agreement if there is a strong pressure asserted on them by international community which is not there at this time. Sudan is taking advantage of a weaker South Sudan economically and militarily if things were to get out of hand any time and I don’t think any of these countries will really afford to go back to war at this time particularly South Sudan is at the weakest position compared to North Sudan. But considering humanitarian situation, it would be a disaster considering current ongoing humanitarians situations in both countries caused by wars.
I believed South Sudan can still afford to give even 10% - 15% of its oil revenue for s two to three years as a form of helping Sudan adjust to the loss of 78% of oil revenue it used to control before South Sudan became independence compared to impact of stopping oil production as a result of disputes on oil. Am sure it could yield some positive results for both nations to continue to find a better ground for settling outstanding issues such as the issue of border dispute, Abyei Referendum, some of ongoing conflicts in South Kordofan and Blue Nile that are also a problem to South Sudan.
The recent step taken by the Khartoum to released four tank oil vessels yet to unfold in more details what it means to South Sudan since it has not formally responded whether to resume its oil production and export it through North Sudan.
These views are presented from Nyok’s analysis of recent developments in both North and South Sudan. Nyok is a Transnational Research Officer with STATT.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Review on Latest Developments in both North and South Sudan Dec 1st-2011- Jan 31st -2012
Review on Latest Developments in both North and South Sudan: Post-Independence Politics of Oil (Economic War) & Tribal Conflicts that have rocked South Sudan over the last two months. What does it means to both adversaries that need stability with economy and security.
December 1st – 2011 - January 31st 2012: Nyok Achuoth Gor a Transnational Research Officer with STATT has been following recent developments between two adversaries with interest and significant worry one how will this economic wars end.
What does unilateral decisions over oil dispute means to the fragile Post-Independence negotiations between the two Sudans since South Sudan became independence from the rest of Sudan? How will the game of long adversaries’ support to rebels from both sides end?
Below are some of the thoughts that Nyok presents on behalf of STATT that is so committed to share issues of grassroots with the world?
Since the independence of South Sudan from the rest of Sudan, both countries have been engaged in economic cold wars a tit for tat game due to a bitter divorce that both countries had brought about by the CPA signed in 2005. The Northern Sudan has not been making things easy for South do establish itself as a new state coming out from nothing but a war-torn over a period of two decades. Both sides still have lack of trust toward each other due to a long adversary on issues of economic development as one of the item on the menu of civil war.
The latest developments of both countries’ unilateral decision over oil revenues dispute where both sides have been accusing each other since the independence of South Sudan puts the current fragile diplomatic relation and negotiations into a risk of collapse. And since oil has been one of the items that made both sides go to war for such a long time. Oil could still play some significant role for better or bad since both sides depend on oil heavily. Unilateral decision that was made by South Sudan to shut down its oil production because South Sudan government believed that this is a daylight robbing of its own resource by North Sudan. While North Sudan accuses South Sudan for not paying oil transit fees for oil of which there has been no agreement reached over oil dispute since both parties have been heavily involved in the negotiation after the referendum of Southern Sudan.
Therefore, in my view such unilateral decisions could lead the already fragile relation defined by many issues including oil, border demarcation dispute, debts sharing and citizenships among many others between the two sides. Both countries need to constantly engage in negotiation so that a consensus agreement on oil dispute is achieved before things go out of hand which could result into a conflict of which Sudan has been trying to instigate but South Sudan has been unable to militarily respond due to its own strategic move to avoid going back to war with North Sudan.
The current talk being mediated by the African Union High Level Implementation Panel led by former South African President Mbeki has not been really yielding any progress so far simply due to lack of pressure from African Union as a peak body in the continent on both adversaries over an oil dispute. This means much more pressure need to be asserted on both sides in order for them to come to consensus and this would not be really offer by African Union alone but international community’s involvement is highly recommended in that case and this could lead to both sides coming to genuine consensus.
How will the game of long adversaries’ for support to rebels from both sides end?
South Sudan has been rocked by tribal and militias conflict before and after the referendum conduct and independence of South Sudan on July 9th 2011. In the last two months tribal conflicts have been worsening particularly in Jonglei between Murle, Nuer-Lou and Dinka Bor tribal groups which have claimed thousands of innocent lives and left hundreds of thousands of people displaced from their homes that have been destroyed as well. However, the ongoing tribal conflicts are being fuel by cattle rustling with women and children kidnapping practices that raise the question of whether the government of South Sudan is really able to provide security to its own people without giving excuses that Khartoum of arming certain tribes such as Murle through rebel groups based within South Sudan. This kind of excuses could prove what opponents of South Sudanese in Khartoum have been arguing (during the civil war 1983-2005) that South Sudanese people are incapable to manage and deliver security needed to their own civilian which is happening now.
Besides the worrying trend within South Sudan, conflicts have been going on within North Sudan’s Southern Kordofan and Blue states between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and Sudan People Liberation Movement/Army-North (SPLM/A-N) sector since the June 2011 are being blamed on Juba as the supporter of SPLM/A-North against Khartoum. This tit for tat game will continue to put the current fragile relationship into a risky situation and that is not what is really needed at this time between both Sudans. These developments of (conflicts) are likely to continue until both sides are able to settle issues of significant concern such as the oil dispute that tends to surge above the water and that would reduce stretching apart both countries at this time.
Is the proposed Pipeline through Kenya as per the last week signed memo between GoSS and Kenya a viable and alternative solution or will it adversely increase the problem between the North and South Sudan? Is Kenya the best reliable nation that will guarantee a safe route for exporting South's oil to the international market?
The question of proposed pipeline agreement between the government of South Sudan and Kenyan government is also a very important latest development that needs deep analysis because there are challenges too on this proposed pipeline which include the cost to build the pipeline, time frame for its completion and will this strategy be a threatening one to Sudan so that it soften its behaviours toward South Sudan. There is no doubt that this new proposed pipeline will benefit Kenya or any other country that the landlocked South Sudan will build its oil pipeline through and definitely that country will gain transit fees. Hence, this will improve relation between South Sudan and Kenya or any other country that South Sudan will build its pipeline through and government have proposed four alternative routes.
Nonetheless, this development could exacerbate the already fragile relation between the North and South Sudan because North Sudan will definitely lose oil revenue that it would have obtains through the pipeline that has been use to export oil to the international market through Port Sudan.
Is Kenya the best reliable nation that will guarantee a safe route for exporting South's oil to the international market?
On the question whether, is Kenya the best reliable nation that will guarantee a safe route for exporting South Sudan’s oil to the international market? It is not yet clear at this time because my fear is that according to the politics of free market each nation including Kenya always work hard to put their interest first than the interest of South Sudan and who knows whether Kenya or any other country (proposed in South Sudan’s four alternative routes for pipeline) will charge South Sudan with high transit fees as Sudan is now pushing at the ongoing negotiation.
Hence this thinking is provoked by the fact that both Sudans can reach a good agreement if there is a strong pressure asserted on them by international community which is not there at this time. Sudan is taking advantage of a weaker South Sudan economically and militarily if things were to get out of hand any time and I don’t think any of these countries will really afford to go back to war at this time particularly South Sudan is at the weakest position compared to North Sudan. But considering humanitarian situation, it would be a disaster considering current ongoing humanitarians situations in both countries caused by wars.
I believed South Sudan can still afford to give even 10% - 15% of its oil revenue for s two to three years as a form of helping Sudan adjust to the loss of 78% of oil revenue it used to control before South Sudan became independence compared to impact of stopping oil production as a result of disputes on oil. Am sure it could yield some positive results for both nations to continue to find a better ground for settling outstanding issues such as the issue of border dispute, Abyei Referendum, some of ongoing conflicts in South Kordofan and Blue Nile that are also a problem to South Sudan.
The recent step taken by the Khartoum to released four tank oil vessels yet to unfold in more details what it means to South Sudan since it has not formally responded whether to resume its oil production and export it through North Sudan.
These views are presented from Nyok’s analysis of recent developments in both North and South Sudan. Nyok is a Transnational Research Officer with STATT.
December 1st – 2011 - January 31st 2012: Nyok Achuoth Gor a Transnational Research Officer with STATT has been following recent developments between two adversaries with interest and significant worry one how will this economic wars end.
What does unilateral decisions over oil dispute means to the fragile Post-Independence negotiations between the two Sudans since South Sudan became independence from the rest of Sudan? How will the game of long adversaries’ support to rebels from both sides end?
Below are some of the thoughts that Nyok presents on behalf of STATT that is so committed to share issues of grassroots with the world?
Since the independence of South Sudan from the rest of Sudan, both countries have been engaged in economic cold wars a tit for tat game due to a bitter divorce that both countries had brought about by the CPA signed in 2005. The Northern Sudan has not been making things easy for South do establish itself as a new state coming out from nothing but a war-torn over a period of two decades. Both sides still have lack of trust toward each other due to a long adversary on issues of economic development as one of the item on the menu of civil war.
The latest developments of both countries’ unilateral decision over oil revenues dispute where both sides have been accusing each other since the independence of South Sudan puts the current fragile diplomatic relation and negotiations into a risk of collapse. And since oil has been one of the items that made both sides go to war for such a long time. Oil could still play some significant role for better or bad since both sides depend on oil heavily. Unilateral decision that was made by South Sudan to shut down its oil production because South Sudan government believed that this is a daylight robbing of its own resource by North Sudan. While North Sudan accuses South Sudan for not paying oil transit fees for oil of which there has been no agreement reached over oil dispute since both parties have been heavily involved in the negotiation after the referendum of Southern Sudan.
Therefore, in my view such unilateral decisions could lead the already fragile relation defined by many issues including oil, border demarcation dispute, debts sharing and citizenships among many others between the two sides. Both countries need to constantly engage in negotiation so that a consensus agreement on oil dispute is achieved before things go out of hand which could result into a conflict of which Sudan has been trying to instigate but South Sudan has been unable to militarily respond due to its own strategic move to avoid going back to war with North Sudan.
The current talk being mediated by the African Union High Level Implementation Panel led by former South African President Mbeki has not been really yielding any progress so far simply due to lack of pressure from African Union as a peak body in the continent on both adversaries over an oil dispute. This means much more pressure need to be asserted on both sides in order for them to come to consensus and this would not be really offer by African Union alone but international community’s involvement is highly recommended in that case and this could lead to both sides coming to genuine consensus.
How will the game of long adversaries’ for support to rebels from both sides end?
South Sudan has been rocked by tribal and militias conflict before and after the referendum conduct and independence of South Sudan on July 9th 2011. In the last two months tribal conflicts have been worsening particularly in Jonglei between Murle, Nuer-Lou and Dinka Bor tribal groups which have claimed thousands of innocent lives and left hundreds of thousands of people displaced from their homes that have been destroyed as well. However, the ongoing tribal conflicts are being fuel by cattle rustling with women and children kidnapping practices that raise the question of whether the government of South Sudan is really able to provide security to its own people without giving excuses that Khartoum of arming certain tribes such as Murle through rebel groups based within South Sudan. This kind of excuses could prove what opponents of South Sudanese in Khartoum have been arguing (during the civil war 1983-2005) that South Sudanese people are incapable to manage and deliver security needed to their own civilian which is happening now.
Besides the worrying trend within South Sudan, conflicts have been going on within North Sudan’s Southern Kordofan and Blue states between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and Sudan People Liberation Movement/Army-North (SPLM/A-N) sector since the June 2011 are being blamed on Juba as the supporter of SPLM/A-North against Khartoum. This tit for tat game will continue to put the current fragile relationship into a risky situation and that is not what is really needed at this time between both Sudans. These developments of (conflicts) are likely to continue until both sides are able to settle issues of significant concern such as the oil dispute that tends to surge above the water and that would reduce stretching apart both countries at this time.
Is the proposed Pipeline through Kenya as per the last week signed memo between GoSS and Kenya a viable and alternative solution or will it adversely increase the problem between the North and South Sudan? Is Kenya the best reliable nation that will guarantee a safe route for exporting South's oil to the international market?
The question of proposed pipeline agreement between the government of South Sudan and Kenyan government is also a very important latest development that needs deep analysis because there are challenges too on this proposed pipeline which include the cost to build the pipeline, time frame for its completion and will this strategy be a threatening one to Sudan so that it soften its behaviours toward South Sudan. There is no doubt that this new proposed pipeline will benefit Kenya or any other country that the landlocked South Sudan will build its oil pipeline through and definitely that country will gain transit fees. Hence, this will improve relation between South Sudan and Kenya or any other country that South Sudan will build its pipeline through and government have proposed four alternative routes.
Nonetheless, this development could exacerbate the already fragile relation between the North and South Sudan because North Sudan will definitely lose oil revenue that it would have obtains through the pipeline that has been use to export oil to the international market through Port Sudan.
Is Kenya the best reliable nation that will guarantee a safe route for exporting South's oil to the international market?
On the question whether, is Kenya the best reliable nation that will guarantee a safe route for exporting South Sudan’s oil to the international market? It is not yet clear at this time because my fear is that according to the politics of free market each nation including Kenya always work hard to put their interest first than the interest of South Sudan and who knows whether Kenya or any other country (proposed in South Sudan’s four alternative routes for pipeline) will charge South Sudan with high transit fees as Sudan is now pushing at the ongoing negotiation.
Hence this thinking is provoked by the fact that both Sudans can reach a good agreement if there is a strong pressure asserted on them by international community which is not there at this time. Sudan is taking advantage of a weaker South Sudan economically and militarily if things were to get out of hand any time and I don’t think any of these countries will really afford to go back to war at this time particularly South Sudan is at the weakest position compared to North Sudan. But considering humanitarian situation, it would be a disaster considering current ongoing humanitarians situations in both countries caused by wars.
I believed South Sudan can still afford to give even 10% - 15% of its oil revenue for s two to three years as a form of helping Sudan adjust to the loss of 78% of oil revenue it used to control before South Sudan became independence compared to impact of stopping oil production as a result of disputes on oil. Am sure it could yield some positive results for both nations to continue to find a better ground for settling outstanding issues such as the issue of border dispute, Abyei Referendum, some of ongoing conflicts in South Kordofan and Blue Nile that are also a problem to South Sudan.
The recent step taken by the Khartoum to released four tank oil vessels yet to unfold in more details what it means to South Sudan since it has not formally responded whether to resume its oil production and export it through North Sudan.
These views are presented from Nyok’s analysis of recent developments in both North and South Sudan. Nyok is a Transnational Research Officer with STATT.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)