sudan referendum Archives

January 12, 2011January 14, 2011

South Sudan food Security Improves

Prospects for future food security in southern Sudan depend highly on how the post-referendum period evolves.

12 January 2011, Rome/Juba – The number of people in need of food assistance in southern Sudan has decreased markedly – though prospects for food security largely depend on the post-referendum period and the number of people returning to the South, a United Nations report said today.

An assessment by the UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and World Food Programme (WFP) warned that recent gains in food security, especially in states bordering on northern Sudan, such as Upper Nile and Unity, could be reversed by increasing food prices and any escalation of localized conflict.

“The overall food security situation improved markedly in 2010 compared to the previous year largely because of the favourable rains,” said WFP Regional Director for Sudan Amer Daoudi. “That is absolutely no reason for complacency now. More than a million people will still need food assistance and the situation could swiftly deteriorate at this critical time.”

Crop growing conditions were generally good in 2010, the report said. Rainfall started on time in most locations and rainfall levels were normal to above normal and generally well distributed. Despite some localised dry spells and floods, 2010 cereal crop production is estimated at 695 000 tons, nearly 30 percent higher than 2009. This estimate leaves an overall cereal deficit in 2011 of about 291 000 tonnes to be covered by commercial imports and food assistance.

“However, with a forecast of about 400 000 people returning to vote the estimated deficit may increase up to 340 000 tonnes, said FAO economist Mario Zappacosta. “Returnees are expected to further increase the pressure on local food market supplies.”

The report said that in the best-case scenario of a peaceful referendum process in the South, the number of people receiving emergency food assistance would rise gradually this year and was expected to peak at 1.4 million during the start of the lean season from March until August.

Prospects for future food security depended highly on how the referendum that started from 9 January and the post-referendum periods evolve, according to the report.

“Recent gains could easily be reversed due to the following risk factors: increasing food prices due to reduced trade flows and increased demand from returnees, a potential escalation of localized conflicts in the border areas, and potential increases of ethnic and inter-tribal tensions,” FAO/WFP said.

In the event of reduced trade, increased demand, high food prices and increased insecurity in the post-referendum period, the number of people receiving emergency food assistance out of the 2011 projected total population of 9.16 million in southern Sudan could reach 2.7 million at the start of the annual lean or hunger season when the previous harvest runs out.

The FAO/WFP mission estimated that 890 000 people were currently severely food insecure in the South and 2.4 million were moderately food insecure.

It said with uncertainties over the referendum the supply of grains from northern Sudan and to a lesser extent from Uganda and Kenya was expected to decline substantially. Grain stocks were declining in some border areas, leading to increased prices, which would also come under pressure from large numbers of returnees. So far, more than 120,000 people have returned since October and up to 250,000 are expected to have arrived by early February.

(FAO)

January 10, 2011January 14, 2011

Sudan: George Clooney In Southern Sudan To Monitor Referendum For Independence (update 12.50 Est)

Southern Sudanese vote for independence this week

Nyarko Benso, TalkAfrique

Hollywood actor George Clooney is in Sudan to show his support for and keep an eye on the independence referendum that is underway in Southern Sudan. The people of Southern Sudan are going to the ballot this week to decide on secession or otherwise remain part of the United Sudan.

Speaking about his mission in Sudan over the weekend, Mr. Clooney said

“I am excited to see a country vote for its freedom for the first time. I’ve never been around to see one of those before and I’m very honored that I’m able to be a witness of this kind of independence,”

The Hollywood Star has been a fervent activist for human rights in Sudan. He is currently collaborating with Google and other agencies of the United Nations to monitor the situation in Sudan and prevent possible pandemonium that may result from the vote this week. Their endeavor is referred the ‘Genocide Paparazzi’ in some quarters while Mr. Clooney is officially dubbed the ‘Messenger of Peace’ for the United Nations.

Some 3.9 million Southern Sudanese have registered to vote in the referendum, which is part of the 2005 peace agreement that ended a 22-year north-south civil war in which around two million people were killed.

Voting commenced over the weekend. Isolated violence has been reported in some places but overall, the process seems to be moving as envisioned.

Update: There has been clashes in Sudan’s disputed oil-rich Abyei region. At least 30 people have been killed including police, reports say

January 2, 2011January 2, 2011

Southern Sudan: Building a New Nation

Cameron Sinclair

Co-founder of Architecture for Humanity and the Open Architecture Network

In seven days millions of residents in Southern Sudan have the opportunity to decide their future by voting for independence. The outcome is pointing towards a new nation state and the international community will rally around its birth. The real issue is whether the international community will help or hinder the development of Southern Sudan.

Adopting and Tackling Humanitarian Issues
The new nation, like many fragile states, will inherit a number of systemic issues. Ninety percent of the population live on less than one dollar per day. Approximately one in ten children do not make their fifth birthday and material mortality is the highest in the world. Southern Sudan doesn’t only need doctors and clinics but an entire health care system. Then there is education. It is hard enough for a country to build a health system, try also having to build an education system, infrastructure and an economic base will be a monumental achievement. In an oil rich region, this should be the last place to be burdened with extreme poverty.

International NGO Involvement: Good or Bad?
The heavy handed approach by some well meaning international non-governmental organizations can spell disaster for a country trying to stand on it’s own legs. In post conflict countries the international community steps in to help support a weak political and social system. The danger is when the international community unintentionally creates a ‘hand to mouth’ aid system that negates or overrides local small businesses and government initiatives.

Recently we worked in a city supporting a local low-cost health care business build and open a series of clinics. With a strong business model the clinics began to expand across the city only to find resistance from ‘donor driven’ clinics offering free services. Countries like Haiti have suffered from this competitive giving strategy. Where aid funding undermines economic incentive or a government’s ability to develop local systems is dangerous and can lead to further destabilization.

Supporting Good Governance While Supporting Existing Government
Salva Kiir, voted in with 93% of the vote, will probably be the first president of Southern Sudan. How the world works with his government with make or break this emerging nation.

This is not a reboot. Academics and policy makers might have an idealized vision of starting a new nation but fragile states are never one borne from a clean slate. Most western states would not survive the sort of restrictions that get placed on developing countries in their bid to emerge out of poverty. We need to find ways to empower and support the new government without forcing predetermined notions of good governance.

Rule of Law
Beyond schools and health facilities the new nation state needs to support their governance with a strong rule of law. This is just not about police and judicial system but full accountability of aid and development — for a new nation state, the biggest game in town. In our digital world it should be fairly easy to cross reference GIS mapping, crowd sourced information (using mobile technologies) and online accountability to create a more transparent system of aid.

Creating Communities Anchors
For the past decade community led or community-driven development has re-entered the rebuilding process. Those who look down on community involvement claim it allows weak local stakeholders the ability to disburse cash without proper oversight. This is a bit of a chicken and egg situation. There will always be a number of bad apples but unless you are willing to trust local stakeholders there will never be local ownership of facilities. Given the percentage of aid siphoned off before entering local communities it’s a little like complaining someone is taking the crust off the bread while tucking into a steak dinner. Communities need basic services, small business development and, in the case of Southern Sudan, agricultural innovation. Let’s not tie down the community with heavy handed policy just to satisfy Western based reporting systems.

I’m not a policy wonk, nor an academic expert. I build communities, ones with integrated health and education facilities and woven together with economic avenues. Before we go in to build in Southern Sudan there must be a strong foundation, one that supports local governance and international collaboration. If you have ideas, thoughts or criticism, add them below.

This is part one in a three part series. I will be writing a second look at Southern Sudan post referendum results and the third six month on.

Follow Cameron Sinclair on Twitter: www.twitter.com/casinclair

December 29, 2010January 16, 2011

Clooney, Google, UN Team Up To Watch Sudan Border

Matthew Lee

A group founded by American actor George Clooney said Tuesday it has teamed up with Google, a U.N. agency and anti-genocide organizations to launch satellite surveillance of the border between north and south Sudan to try to prevent a new civil war after the south votes in a secession referendum next month.

Clooney’s Not On Our Watch is funding the start-up phase Satellite Sentinel Project that will collect real-time satellite imagery and combine it with field analysis from the Enough Project and the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, organizers said.

The data will point out movements of troops, civilians and other signs of impending conflict. The U.N. Operational Satellite Applications Program and Google will then publish the findings online.

“We want to let potential perpetrators of genocide and other war crimes know that we’re watching, the world is watching,” Clooney said in a statement. “War criminals thrive in the dark. It’s a lot harder to commit mass atrocities in the glare of the media spotlight.”

The groups hope that early warnings will reduce the risk of violence.

Southern Sudan’s looming Jan. 9 independence referendum has raised fears of renewed north-south civil war. The vote is the result of a 2005 peace deal that ended a 21-year conflict that claimed the lives of two million people and left twice as many displaced.

Organizers said the Satellite Sentinel Project will be available online Wednesday at . http://www.satsentinel.org

December 27, 2010January 19, 2011

Sudan vote a test for all Africa

On January 9, the people of south Sudan will vote in a referendum to decide whether they will remain part of a united Sudan or form a new independent state

Thabo Mbeki

The entire continent is watching to see if diverse communities can live in peaceful mutual respect.

IT HAS been said, correctly, that Sudan is a microcosm of Africa. For this reason, the entire continent will follow events in Sudan over the next few months with the greatest interest.

On January 9, the people of south Sudan will vote in a referendum to decide whether they will remain part of a united Sudan or form a new independent state. If they choose the latter option, the new state will come into being in July.

During the same period, even as Sudan is addressing the issue of its north-south relations, it will also have to arrive at a comprehensive agreement to end the conflict in Darfur.

During its nearly 55 years of independence, Sudan has experienced a succession of violent conflicts, in the south, the west (Darfur) and the east. It is commonly accepted that what lay at the root of these conflicts was the failure of independent Sudan – one of Africa’s most racially, ethnically, religiously and culturally diverse countries – to construct a polity informed by the principle and practice of unity in diversity.

This challenge faces almost all African countries as they seek to construct stable and peaceful societies. Nearly all civil wars and other violent conflicts in post-colonial Africa have occurred because of the failure to manage properly the diversity that characterises these countries.

These conflicts have taught Africa that, in order to contain the centrifugal pressures that encourage fragmentation within our relatively new states, a conscious effort must be made to nurture and entrench national unity, which must include democratic practices. Conflict has also communicated the unequivocal message that unity cannot be secured and maintained by force alone.

Rather, it is only by respecting our diversity – ensuring that each social group enjoys a shared sense of belonging rather than feeling marginalised and excluded – that the state’s unity and peace can be guaranteed.

Sudan has learnt these lessons through harsh practical experience, including war.

As long ago as 1975, Gafaar al-Nimeiry, Sudan’s military head of state, stated with great prescience what Sudan and Africa needed to do to achieve peace and stability. “Unity based on diversity has become the essence and the raison d’etre of the political and national entity of many an emerging African country today. We take pride in that the Sudan of the Revolution has become the exemplary essence of this new hope. The Sudan is the biggest country in Africa. It lies in its heart and at its crossroads. Its extensive territory borders [nine] African countries. Common frontiers mean common ethnic origins, common cultures and shared ways of life and environmental conditions. Trouble in the Sudan would, by necessity, spill over its frontiers, and vice versa. A turbulent and unstable Sudan would not therefore be a catalyst of peace and stability in Africa, and vice versa.”

Unfortunately, failure to implement policies based on genuine respect for this perspective plunged Sudan into its second costly north-south war, fuelled the violent conflicts in western and eastern Sudan, and created the possibility of the south’s secession. Given this history, it is clear that the governments of Sudan and south Sudan, as well as the overwhelming majority of the Sudanese people, have had enough of war and passionately desire peace.

The processes in which the Sudanese parties are currently engaged – the preparations for the south Sudan referendum, negotiations on post-referendum arrangements, and the search for a negotiated settlement in Darfur – are all informed by this desire for peace. For this reason, Africa is following Sudan’s evolution with intense interest – and is eager to see this country “at the heart and crossroads of Africa” give substance to al-Nimeiry’s vision.

But, regardless of the outcome of the south Sudan referendum, the impending developments in Sudan will result in important changes to the structure of the Sudanese state. In this context, the Sudanese parties – north and south – have accepted the important principle of establishing “two viable states” if the south secedes.

As happens during periods of major and rapid change, the country will experience social tension, uncertainty and unease. Africa is keen that the Sudanese leadership co-operate effectively to manage this delicate situation, in the interest of the continent as a whole. This requires that Sudan’s various leadership collectives have sufficient strength and cohesion to bring their constituencies into the settlement, and therefore that no one, from near or afar, does anything to weaken any of these collectives.

It is in Africa’s interest to see Sudan’s people living together in peace and co-operating with one another for their mutual benefit – fully respecting one another’s diverse but not mutually exclusive interests, whether they live in one country or two. A Sudan that truly embodied “the exemplary essence” of respect for diversity of which al-Nimeiry spoke would serve as a catalyst for peace and stability on our continent.

It is to be hoped that the sustained and enormous international focus on Sudan has as its objective providing the necessary support to the Sudanese people to help them achieve this goal, including building two viable states, as may be necessary.

Thabo Mbeki, a former president of South Africa, is chairman of the African Union High Level Implementation Panel for Sudan.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2010.

December 15, 2010December 17, 2010

Will Sudan lead the way to the next big carve-up?

Charles Onyango-Obbo

Finally, the January referendum wheels seem to be turning irreversibly in Southern Sudan. There was a lot of excitement even with the registration that ended last Tuesday, by which time three million had registered.

Now it looks like the January 9, 2011, when the region is highly likely to vote to secede, will be on schedule. If not, the delay will only be by a few weeks.

So far a lot of attention has been focused on whether Khartoum will sabotage the referendum, and plunge the country back into war.

However, there is another organisation that is quite uneasy with the prospect of South Sudan independence — the African Union.

At one point the AU was categorical that it did not think secession was the best option for South Sudan. Lately, as the inevitable draws close, it has softened its position.

However, it remains mealy-mouthed.

The AU is concerned about South Sudan, because African leaders fear what effect secession will have on their own mostly poorly managed and poor nations.

Some African countries are too big for their leaders to run effectively.

For that reason, one can argue that it makes sense for Sudan, Africa’s largest country, to be split in two, even if it hadn’t endured decades of a bitter civil war.

If South Sudan’s secession creates a domino effect, it is not difficult to see which ones will fall first.

Most immediately, next door, it will help complete Somaliland’s consolidation into an independent or, at least, autonomous state.

There are, indeed, Somali academics who claim that the UK, for one, wants Somaliland, which was once a British protectorate, to break away.

In the long run, depending on how the February 2011 elections and next five years turn out, northern Uganda — where there have already been secessionist rumblings — could look to form a loose federation with Southern Sudan and the Lendu of the DR Congo in a bigger “Lendu Republic” as hardline Sudanic/Luo chauvinists in East Africa sometimes refer to that political project.

Sooner than that, DR Congo could follow Somaliland.

The DRC is likely to split into four; the western part will be one block, then the eastern “Kiswahili region” will break up into three.

One, further south, will be a Rwanda sphere of influence. The middle portion could be a Uganda-allied state. And the northern bit would walk off to be part of the Lendu Republic.

The one that would really shake Africa would be Nigeria. Indeed, the eccentric Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi (the man with the “voluptuous blonde” Ukrainian nurse), has suggested that Nigeria be split into north and south, as one way of stopping the periodical orgies of Christian-Muslim slaughter.

The Nigerian government was outraged, but that is a popular view in the oil-rich south, which thinks the north are a bunch of freeloading gun-toting Muslim extremists.

Back in the East African Community, the Zanzibar Isles, which have never been quite happy in their marriage to mainland Tanzania, could swim off to relish the pleasures of their spices without the overlordship of condescending Dar es Salaam.

*Charles Onyango-Obbo is Nation Media Group’s executive editor for Africa & Digital Media. E-mail: cobbo@ke.nationmedia.com

December 7, 2010December 12, 2010

Endgame in Sudan

George Clooney and John Prendergast

Africa’s next deadly war does not have to happen. In little over a month, the people of Southern Sudan will vote for independence, taking with them up to three-quarters of the country’s known oil reserves and placing millions of civilians in the potential path of war.

They’ve done it before. The north and the south fought a 20-year civil war that ended in 2005 only after 2 million people were dead.

We recently spent time in Sudan along the border between the north and south and saw what a return to war could look like. Not On Our Watch and the Enough Project team made this video from our trip to highlight the challenges Sudan faces as it works toward holding a peaceful referendum and avoiding a return to civil war.

Nicholas Kristof premiered this video on his New York Times blog. He wrote, "Let’s hope that the alarms, and the latest burst of diplomacy and spotlight on South Sudan, are enough to avert a new war."

There’s only one month left. It’s frighteningly late, but not too late, to stop the next round of bloodshed before it starts. Renewed war in Sudan is not inevitable. A complex but workable peace can be brokered if all interested parties become more deeply involved, and the US maintains its recent focus on contributing to a solution.

Your voice in support of US diplomacy is key. There is no time to wait. This is happening now. Visit Sudan Now to get involved.

We were late to Rwanda. We were late to Congo. We were late to Darfur. We can’t afford to be late again. This is our chance to actually stop a war before it starts.

George Clooney is an actor and co-founder of the NGO Not On Our Watch. John Prendergast is co-founder of the Enough Project and co-author of The Enough Moment: The Fight to End Human Rights Crimes in Africa.

[youtube]fCjWO146kPc&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

November 21, 2010January 24, 2011

Late, but not too late, for Sudan

George Clooney and John Prendergast

Well, we’re in it now. What we do best. Diplomacy. The White House has dispatched Senator John Kerry to Sudan with a proposal for peace between the North and South. It’s a giant step toward avoiding the kind of bloodshed that killed more than two million people in Sudan’s previous 20-year North-South civil war, which ended only in 2005 — and is threatening to erupt once again.

In recent months, President Barack Obama has stepped up his own involvement and that of senior figures in his administration in support of a peace strategy for Sudan. On his behalf, Kerry has delivered a package of proposals designed to break the logjam that has brought the North and South to a dangerous crossroads.

We have written a memo that spells out some of the essential elements of what a grand bargain for peace in Sudan could look like. If you’re interested in the specifics of a possible peace deal — and in actions that you can take to support it — go to SudanActionNow.org.

There is little time to waste. On January 9, 2011, the people of Southern Sudan will vote for independence from the North, taking with them up to three-quarters of the country’s known oil reserves and placing millions of civilians in the direct path of war.

The government in Khartoum (the capital in the North) is led by Omar al-Bashir, whose accomplishments, which include overseeing war crimes during the previous North-South war and engineering the atrocities in Darfur, have brought him arrest warrants for war crimes and genocide from the International Criminal Court.

And yet renewed war in Sudan is not inevitable. A complex but workable peace can be brokered if all interested parties become more deeply involved. The current moment requires robust diplomacy — the kind that can leave a bad taste in your mouth, but that gets the job done. We believe that Kerry is a skilled emissary and can help the parties find the compromises necessary for peace.

Any agreement preventing a return to war would necessarily involve the National Congress Party, representing the North, and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement, representing the South. But it would also involve the United States, whose post-referendum relationship with the two parties will have enormous influence over whether a deal gets done.

We believe that a grand bargain to lay the foundation for lasting peace between the North and South would oblige the parties to:

Hold the Southern Sudan referendum on time and fully respect and implement the results;
Reach a mutually satisfactory agreement concerning the territory of Abyei, a key disputed border area;
Craft a multi-year revenue-sharing arrangement in which the oil wealth of Abyei and key border areas could be divided equitably between the North and South, with a small percentage going to the Arab Misseriya border populations for development purposes;
Demarcate the uncontested 80% of the border and refer the remaining 20% to binding international arbitration;
Create serious protections for minority groups, with consideration of joint citizenship for certain populations, backed by significant international consequences for attacks on southerners in the North or northerners in the South.

The US role as the invisible third party to the agreement involves a series of incentives offered to the regime in Khartoum to ensure agreement and implementation of a peace deal. In exchange for action on the North-South and Darfur peace efforts, the US would implement a clear, sequenced, and binding path to normalization of relations.

This would involve — in order — removal of Sudan from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, exchange of ambassadors, lifting of unilateral sanctions, and support for bilateral and multilateral debt relief, together with other economic measures by international financial institutions. Conversely, the US must be prepared to lead international efforts to impose severe consequences on any party that plunges the country back into war.

Peace and security in Darfur should be an essential benchmark for normalized relations between the US and Sudan. The Obama administration should hold firm on this through the coming rounds of negotiation, and should appoint a senior official to help coordinate US policy on Darfur in order to ensure that peace efforts there receive the same level of attention as the North-South efforts.

What is needed now is political will — and not only in the US — to sustain this diplomacy. The European Union and Sudan’s neighbors — in particular Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda — will also need to play a robust role. And China’s diplomacy in Sudan, where it has invested massively in developing the country’s oil resources, will be a test of whether or not it intends to be a responsible stakeholder in Africa and the wider world.

Ensuring that governments work toward peace is where you come in. Keep the pressure on them. Support the peace process. Your voice can prevent a war. Not guns. Not money. Just our voices.

The way to peace in Sudan is not simple, but it is achievable. There are hard choices to be made. We can make those choices now, or we can persuade ourselves that peace is too hard or too complex, and then look on resignedly from the sidelines as hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children needlessly die. It’s up to us.