{UAH} Has the fire really ceased?

Jan 29th 2014, 19:32 by D.H. | NAIROBI

THOUGH a ceasefire of any kind in South Sudan was sure to be universally welcomed, the one agreed to on January 23rd inspired little real optimism. Both sides had reasons for signing, without necessarily expecting an immediate or lasting peace. For Salva Kiir, the new country’s president, it was a sop to international critics offered only after his forces had retaken all the main towns. For his rival, Riek Machar, the sacked former vice-president who leads the armed opposition, it was an opportunity to rest and regroup after a string of military defeats.

What happens next—irrespective of the deaths of 10,000-plus people and the fate of the 700,000 or so who have fled their homes—depends largely on the fate of 11 men. These “detainees”, as they are described in the ceasefire agreement, are a group of senior politicians, many of them former ministers, held by Mr Kiir. Their release is widely seen as the key to a proper peace process. Prominent figures hailing from many of the country’s biggest ethnic groups, they were jailed or put under house arrest after Mr Kiir accused them of plotting a coup, led by Mr Machar, who managed to escape.

The ceasefire deal fails to clarify their status. Mr Kiir insists they must stand trial, while Mr Machar, who denies any plot, says the arrests were simply the president’s way of silencing his opponents. If the 11 are still in detention when negotiations begin in neighbouring Ethiopia on February 7th as planned, they are unlikely to get anywhere.

Agreeing to pointless negotiations to relieve outside pressure is a long-standing tradition in the Sudans, north and south. Yet the foreign governments and bodies that have been involved, in particular the United States, the United Nations and the European Union, whose combined aid money is vital for South Sudan, have been largely ignored. “We overestimated our capability to influence these people,” admits a Western diplomat.

Instead it has been Yoweri Museveni, Uganda’s president, who has held the diplomatic sway. He has sent thousands of troops as well as aircraft to fight for Mr Kiir, and has been the feistiest of regional mediators. He will expect to influence the response of the African Union (AU) at a summit that began on January 27th.

Whereas past disputes tended to be fought out as raids and counter-raids, the recent conflict has been much bigger in scale. “It has been incredibly bloody fighting between troops and both sides are stopping to take stock,” said a seasoned military observer. It is not clear if Mr Machar’s forces have the “bullets or the diesel”, he added, to keep up a longer campaign. The president’s advisers are treating the ceasefire as a surrender by the rebels. Despite some defections, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), which still obeys Mr Kiir, has been more effective than the rebels.

At the same time, admits James Hoth Mai, the SPLA’s chief of staff, “the military cannot solve the political problem.” His forces had “given room” to the politicians, who must now work out a durable deal.

That still seems unlikely soon. Messrs Kiir and Machar have let their personal tussle for power boil over into a bloody conflict between their respective tribes, the Dinka and the Nuer. If there is to be a lasting peace, both men may have to stand down. There is no sign that they will. Senior members of the party may have a better chance of working out a peace deal. But most of them are still under arrest. 

--

*A positive mind is a courageous mind, without doubts and fears, using the experience and wisdom to give the best of him/herself.

 

 We must dare invent the future!
The only way of limiting the usurpation of power by
 individuals, the military or otherwise, is to put the people in charge  - Capt. Thomas. Sankara {RIP} ’1949-1987

 *“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent

revolution inevitable”**…  *J.F Kennedy