Peacebuilding

Mounting peace agreements and numerous ceasefire violations have resulted in sustained international pressure on South Sudan’s leaders to end a civil war that has displaced some 4 million people and created a severe humanitarian crisis. In an effort to address the root causes of the crisis, South Sudan’s president, Salva Kiir Mayardit, announced his government’s intention to initiate a national dialogue process in December 2016. While dialogue should be welcomed as a necessary part of peacemaking and reconciliation, South Sudan’s national dialogue process has had its fair share of skepticism and even opposition.
The sixth annual Juba Lecture Series, held in November 2017, focused on themes of dialogue at both the local and national levels. The lectures—a collaboration with the Institute for Justice and Peace Studies at Catholic University of South Sudan, with support from the Australian Embassy in Addis Ababa—are designed to support local knowledge and provide a safe, open space for debate on key issues. This text forms a summary of some of the key debates that were held during the Juba Lecture Series 2017.

This publication provides perspectives from leading analysts and scholars on the dilemmas groups raise for security provision, the South Sudanese state and peacebuilding nationally. It reviews three of the most significant actors – the arrow boys, gelweng and the White Armies – from the ground up, highlighting the need for local peace and security engagement to be based on a better understanding of their diverse roles and histories.

This report focuses on the IGAD-led mediation process from December 2013 to August 2015 to address the conflict in South Sudan. As per a project initiated, led and owned by IGAD, it identifies lessons from the South Sudan peace talks with the aim to inform future IGAD mediation efforts.

These lessons are based on interviews conducted by a team of researchers with mediators, advisers, parties and supporters as well as an analysis of internal IGAD documents concerning the South Sudan peace talks.The report highlights the commitment of IGAD to peacemaking in South Sudan, stepping in within days of the outbreak of violence on 15 December 2013 in Juba, convening an extraordinary Summit and mandating a mediation process led by highly experienced envoys.

IGAD’s resolute action helped to prevent further escalation of violence, kept the parties focused on negotiating a political settlement and produced a comprehensive peace agreement signed in August 2015. However, the August 2015 agreement failed to bring peace to South Sudan. This is because the parties lacked genuine willingness to make peace. This condition indeed characterized the South Sudan peace talks throughout. The report cautions IGAD mediators not to rush the process of negotiations. In the interests of sustainable peace, there may be no alternative to strategic patience until the parties reach a sufficient degree of consensus and reconciliation.When the talks reached a standstill in early 2015, IGAD mediators and partners applied leverage, pushing the parties to sign an agreement. This included increased diplomatic pressure, the imposition of targeted sanctions, the threat of an arms embargo and a directive mediation strategy presenting parties with an agreement on a take it or leave it basis. While this strategy produced an agreement, it undermined the parties’ ownership of the agreement, without which sustainable peace is not possible.

South Sudan is facing worsening economic conditions due to conflict, climate shocks, and oil dependency, leading to inflation, food insecurity, and unemployment. Communities adapt through informal support systems and local production. Mercy Corps calls for aid to align with local resilience efforts to sustain livelihoods amid ongoing crises.

International, national and local political discourses often portray the Murle community as principal aggressors and the source of much of the instability affecting former Jonglei State in South Sudan. Although such negative stereotypes are partially driven by actual events, they are also manipulated by certain groups to serve political purposes and informed by the assumption that there is a lack of credible authority structure among the Murle. Changing Power Among Murle Chiefs investigates how Murle customary authorities—in particular, red chiefs—navigate and negotiate political, military and spiritual authority, while simultaneously challenging the view that Murle society has no organic leaderships structures. The challenge is not the absence of leadership structures but rather their abundance and the difficulties they pose for the ability of outsiders to navigate them.