News Analysis: Sanctions loom as South Sudan rivals miss peace deadline
Xinhua, March 5, 2015 Adjust font size:
The deadline for the two rivals in South Sudanese to reach a peace deal is about to elapse when the UN is waving sanctions against both sides, which observers regard as a double-edged sword on Wednesday.
It is only one day ahead of the Thursday deadline which was set by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), but the reality does not hint any possibility that the South Sudanese government and the rebels would reach a comprehensive peace agreement to end the conflict in the newborn state.
While everyone is racing against time, the UN Security Council (UNSC) on Tuesday adopted a U.S.-backed resolution to impose sanctions on the warring parties in South Sudan.
According to the resolution, the situation in South Sudan is still threatening the international peace and security.
In the meantime, and in its first reaction, South Sudan claimed that the possible UN sanctions would cripple the peace process and affect its citizens.
South Sudan Foreign Minister Barnaba Benjamin said in a statement that "any sanctions on South Sudan would not only hinder the peace process, but will inherently be felt by our countrymen and women down to the very basic level."
He added that his government is determined to find a permanent solution through negotiations instead of war.
Analysts believed that imposing sanctions on South Sudan could be a double-edged sword.
"Sanctions have proved to be ineffective and I don't expect them to leave a positive effect in South Sudan," Philip Ako, a South Sudanese political analyst, told Xinhua. "It is not good for the South Sudan people to be exposed to sanctions that would negatively affect them."
"The two parties need to be encouraged and motivated and not threatened with sanctions. It is unfair to treat the government and the rebels equally because imposition of sanction against Juba government would be a good thing for the rebels and could push them towards more obstinacy," he noted.
Philip further excluded that the two sides would reach a deal before the deadline, as "There are essential differences that are difficult to be resolved within hours. What is needed now is to bridge the gap and narrow the stances without commitment to the deadline which end on March 5."
In contrast, Edward Ezekiel, another South Sudanese political analyst, supported the UN move to impose sanctions, as it "would push the two parties to give concessions."
"The message reached the rivals in the South that the international community is frustrated regarding their failure to live up to their responsibilities toward the South Sudanese people. This is a clear message that the international community is serious in punishing whoever cripples the peace efforts," he added.
Edward further refuted the talks that the sanctions would have negative effects on South Sudanese citizens.
"First of all, the South Sudanese people are already suffering from poverty, lack of development and bad living conditions. All these are caused by the war which destroyed everything and halted the development process," he said.
He added that "the sanctions, if imposed, would only harm the politicians and military men from both sides, namely with regard to freezing their bank assets, banning them from traveling or judicially pursuing them through the International Criminal Court. These measures do not harm the people at all."
The major difference between the two warring sides is that Juba rejects the rebels' proposal that there should be two armies in South Sudan to be merged after results of the general elections, which are scheduled for 30 months after signing a peace deal, is announced.
The government also refuses to grant the rebels 45 percent representation in power, not to mention other issues of difference such as the security, economy, justice and social reconciliation.
South Sudanese President Salva Kiir Mayardit has been in direct talks with the rebel leader, Riek Machar, since Tuesday in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa, in a bid to overcome those issues and reach an agreement to end the armed conflict in South Sudan.
As the direct talks between the two rivals have not achieved any progress yet, IGAD seemed to be determined to transfer the file to the UNSC after the two parties have repeatedly failed to reach a deal.
In this connection, Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn was reported by local South Sudanese media to have said that the region and the international community would not stand and watch a humanitarian and political crisis in South Sudan continue.
He urged Kiir and Machar to resolve the issues and be courageous to give necessary compromises instead of a mere repetition of previous promises.
Kiir and Riek signed an agreement on Feb. 2, stipulating a cease-fire, power sharing and formation of an interim government prior to reaching a comprehensive prospect for ending the conflict by Thursday.
The agreement, unlike previous ones, included detailed suggestions on power sharing, in which Kiir should be the president and Machar the vice president, provided that a second vice president is to be named from the Equatoria areas.
South Sudan plunged into violence in December 2013, when fighting erupted between troops loyal to President Kiir and defectors led by his former deputy Machar.
The conflict soon turned into an all-out war, with the violence taking on an ethnic dimension that pitted the president's Dinka tribe against Machar's Nuer ethnic group.
The clashes have left thousands of South Sudanese dead and forced around 1.9 million people to flee their homes. Endit