POLITICS-SUDAN: Peace Deal Could Be Signed Next Year – Analyst

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Katy Salmon

NAIROBI, Nov 22 2002 (IPS) - Disappointment over the failure of Sudan’s warring parties to sign a protocol on wealth and power sharing at the close of talks on Monday is misplaced, according to a leading analyst.

John Prendergast, co-director of Africa Programme of the International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based think-tank predicts a final deal could still be signed by mid-2003.

After five weeks of peace talks in neighbouring Kenya, the Sudanese government and rebels of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) signed a memorandum extending their current cease-fire until Mar 31, when the next round of talks is scheduled to end. The cease-fire was due to expire on Dec 31.

The next round of talks opens in January. But international pressure for peace will not let up during the Ramadan, Christmas and New Year holidays.

During the recess, the United States, one of the prime movers behind the push for peace in Sudan, is organising seminars to discuss the key issues, which are blocking progress at the talks.

‘’There would be visits to the United States by both the government and the SPLA and the holding of seminars on wealth and power-sharing and other issues,” said Jeff Millington, US charge d’affaires in Sudan, according to Reuters.

Observers had hoped that the two sides would reach an agreement on power and wealth sharing before the end of 2002.

Prendergast believes the failure to do so was a tactical decision by both sides.

‘’The protocol that was hoped for was not signed for a rational reason. Both sides wanted to hold back on final compromises until the very end when they’ll be able to use those issues to trade for other things they want. That’s completely understandable,” he says.

‘’Forward movement is occurring. The closer you get, you’ll get people digging into their bottom lines,” he predicts.

The two parties did sign a document covering a few points of agreement – to hold general elections and a census during a six-year transitional period and to give southern Sudanese fair representation in the civil service and legislative chambers.

But it was impossible to agree as to who would hold the top jobs in government. The SPLA was willing to sign a proposed deal, which called for a government of national unity with a rotating presidency and vice-presidency, but the Khartoum government was not, according to media reports.

The division of ministries also proved tricky. SPLA spokesperson Samson Kwaje said the SPLA demanded 40 percent of all ministerial posts in the interim period, but the government rejected this figure as too high.

The warring parties also failed to agree on a concrete figure for the sharing of Sudan’s new-found oil wealth, although they were able to agree on the structure of wealth-sharing, ownership of assets and transparency measures.

It is vital that both sides use the current recess to sell the peace-process to their allies and constituents. They cannot successfully mediate, which will involve making considerable concessions, if they cannot carry all of their supporters with them.

‘’Everyone is worried about the hard-liners over their shoulder,” says Prendergast.

The government in Khartoum faces opposition from militarists and Islamists who fear it is giving too much power away. They believe that a process of state reform, leading to elections, is a slippery slope leading to their loss of power or possible prosecution for war crimes.

‘’These things directly address political survival. Some fear, on the terrorism front or on the war crimes front, that if a deal is struck, they would be left naked,” says Prendergast.

The SPLA has hard-liners, both within the movement and the broader civil society, who want nothing short of independence for southern Sudan. These people see the six-year interim period leading to a referendum, agreed to in July, as a time to prepare for statehood.

This strategy is bound to backfire, says Prendergast. ‘’Promoting unity is critically important. Restructuring the central government, not just building the south, is a prerequisite for dealing with the fundamental interests of southern Sudanese,” he says.

‘’If all the efforts are perceived to be to carve out the southern Sudanese state six years from now, I am certain that the government will undermine and destroy the agreement before the six years are over,” he warns.

‘’If the SPLA is not firmly entrenched in that central authority, they are not going to be able to do anything about it and the war will just resume,” he predicts.

While the SPLA leadership understands this, it will take time to sell the idea to their people.

Meanwhile, the US is keen to play up the achievements so far. ‘’The fighting, killings, will remain stopped. There have been no significant military engagements. Relief is going unimpeded throughout the south and other areas. This is important,” says Millington.