adminAgainst major odds and after more than four decades of fighting, South Sudan on 9th July 2011 officially disengaged from Sudan.
The newly independent state attracted extraordinary outpouring of support from all corners of the globe. The hope was that South Sudan will learn from the missteps of other African countries that struggled mightily after gaining independence.
Hope for the new state was not in short supply despite South Sudan leaders inheriting a geographical area that is virtually bereft of basic infrastructure.
The leadership had to deal with some of the lowest health and education indices in the world. They also had to settle millions of returning citizens, most of them from refugee camps in neighbouring countries.
Due to the scotched policy of Sudan during the war years, South Sudan had only rudimentary civil service. It also lacked a deep bench on modern statecraft.
Far more important, the spectre of political and economic relations with Sudan loomed large over the new country. Despite pledges of cooperation and brotherly love between the leadership of South Sudan and Sudan during the disengagement ceremony last year, it was clear that a rocky future lay ahead.
Today, Juba Sudan and Khartoum Sudan remain locked in a tight deadly embrace of political and economic chicanery. Political cooperation between the two countries is virtually non-existent, jeopardising the resolution of outstanding post-independence issues such as citizen rights, free movement across borders and permanent
status of the disputed Abiyei District.
Both sides accuse each other of supporting rebel movements operating in their countries. Military skirmishes against each other are routine.
On the economic front, South Sudan and Sudan currently engage in a dangerous zero sum game regarding revenue from oil wells mostly located in the new country. South Sudan has reportedly decided to forgo using oil pipelines that traverse the Sudan due to a reportedly outrageous surcharge imposed by Khartoum for transporting oil to global markets.
The outcome of this deadly standoff is that both countries are now deeply wounded, economically. South Sudan is gradually running out of money and hyperinflation remains a distinct possibility if the economic paralysis continues unabated. Sudan is witnessing uprisings by its citizens over enduring economic hardships, war mongering and stifled political space.
The relationship between Juba Sudan and Khartoum Sudan is the most important and most strategic to both countries. Even in the midst of intense loathing and dislike, the leadership of both countries must work together to save their citizens from unnecessary suffering.
The Africa Union, United States, the European Union and China should continue ongoing efforts to reduce belligerency on both sides and to quickly settle outstanding issues.
South Sudan, in addition to the imbroglio with Sudan, is grappling with four exacting challenges. First, its powerful military that dominate the country’s politics cannot go for months without salary and entitlements as government coffers, dry up. An agitated military can easily become a destabilising force in a nascent democracy.
In addition efforts to integrate other militia groups into the military are moving slowly, creating suspicions of favouritism and elitism. Furthermore, promised military demobilisation efforts are yet to take off. Military demobilisation efforts may not even commence as long as the tense standoff with Sudan remains unresolved.
Second, ethnic jingoism remains a significant problem. In a post-conflict country, ethnic distrust is a Pandora box that can have devastating consequences on the political and economic life of the nation.
Third, the hydra-headed monster of corruption is alive and well in South Sudan. The government recently admitted that at least $US4 billion had gone missing from public coffers. It is highly unlikely that South Sudan will make any progress in the future if corruption becomes a way of life. For a nascent government, official corruption can create a permanent distance between the elite and the poor in South Sudan, a dangerous prospect in a country awash with guns and other weapons.
Fourth, the government of South Sudan is yet to implement a comprehensive policy to tap into the expertise of South Sudanese in the Diaspora. The Diaspora can play important, immediate roles in running the civil service, the creation of national institutions, setting up small-and-medium scale enterprises to create employment opportunities and providing health and education services.
The Diaspora can also assist with implementation of public safety services anchored on the rule of law and respect for human rights. The Diaspora can play a critical role in establishing a strong civil society culture in a political system dominated by military veterans.
The last one year has been a period of high hopes and harsh realities for South Sudan. Citizens of South Sudan remain proud of their new country. After one year, well-wishers around the world remain cautiously optimistic about an ancient land that captured the imagination of a greater tomorrow. I am not aware of any valid reason why the leadership of South Sudan and its proud people cannot transform the resource-endowed country into a land of limitless opportunities for its long suffering people.
- Dr. Chinua Akukwe is the former Chair of the Technical Board of the Africa Centre for Health and Human Security at the George Washington University, Washington, DC. He has written extensively on health and development issues, including four books.
Online Reporter