part 2 (see above for part 1)
And finally, I believe the GoSS does read our posts in SWJ or at least the same books:
Quote:
The Chinese government is keen on investing in the oil and agricultural sectors in South Sudan.
Speaking upon her arrival from China where she attended the China African Agricultural Forum, the newly-appointed Government of Southern Sudan’s Minister for Agriculture and Forestry Dr Anne Itto told the press that China has expressed her interest in developing South Sudan.
“From the discussions we had with the Chinese government, it is interested in having more oil blocks. It also wants to invest in minerals. It also expressed real interest to further develop their relationships with the ruling party, the SPLM”, Dr Itto said.
She added that China’s primary interest is not political but a partnership that would allow them to invest for the benefit of South Sudanese.
http://www.gurtong.net/ECM/Editorial...1/Default.aspx
Quote:
GoSS Seeks to Promote Private Sector
“It is our collective responsibility, be it the government, private sector and individuals to ensure that business skills which have been paralysed by the 20 – year civil war is revived for the prosperity of this nation”, said Pan.
The Director General explained that South Sudan’s market is a free market economy hence the government cannot impose laws restricting prices.
“Unless people begin producing local commodities to impact prices on the market, the people will continue buying at the current prices”, he cautioned.
“It would be upon us to utilise the fertile lands for agriculture since the government would never settle all our needs. The role of the government is to provide security and create a conducive atmosphere for its citizens to explore their talents for survival”, he said.
http://www.gurtong.net/ECM/Editorial...3/Default.aspx
Welcome to the ultra liberal popular republic of South Sudan! :cool:
We will see if it either generates some taxes incomes or just sunk the common people in a poverty hole. Economist should remember that before regulating or deregulating the market, you actually need a market. That means a minimum solvability among the population. And relief aid just does not provide that. I know, there are cash for aid programs were you distribute cash straight to the people so they suddenly become solvable. Which is not a so much great idea as when you earn money for nothing, then you wonder why you do not always get your check for free…
But if there is a market booming in South, it’s the one of beer! After 20 years of war for the right to drink, South Sudan beer market is over booming. May be we should assess the effect on the security sector…
Quote:
SABMiller Doubles Output of S.Sudan Brewery
SABMiller said on Friday it would double output at its brewing operations in southern Sudan by the end of the year, a sign of the economic boom taking root in the former war zone.
The decision to lift capacity to 350,000 hectolitres from 180,000 when the Juba-based brewery opened in May 2009 also suggests confidence in the stability of the south, which is likely to vote for independence in a January referendum.
"Many people questioned our logic in building not only the first brewery that southern Sudan had seen for 50 years but also the first manufacturing facility in Juba," said Ian Alsworth-Elvey, managing director of Southern Sudan Beverages Ltd (SSBL).
"However, the business has had a very warm welcome to the country and our beer, soft drinks and water brands have found real traction with consumers," he said.
http://www.gurtong.net/ECM/Editorial...9/Default.aspx
And finally, to come back to our main subject: how to destabilize a future neighboring country, Khartoum is practicing agressive economic warfare:
Quote:
South Sudan bank running out of foreign currency
The finance minister for the semi-autonomous region of Southern Sudan said on Monday that the government there is running short in foreign currency because of Khartoum remitting the South’s share of oil revenue in local currency.
David Deng Athorbei, the regional minister of finance and economic planning, who made the revelation said the move by the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) was deliberate.
“This is a clear and complete violation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. It is one of the most serious violations of the CPA because it has dire consequences,” said Athorbei.
Under the 2005 landmark peace deal between the north and the south, the Government of Southern Sudan’s 50% share of revenues generated from oil within its territory should be paid in hard currency into accounts managed by the Bank of Southern Sudan.
Athorbei noted that this was not the first time the central bank had changed payments for the oil exported from foreign currencies to Sudanese pounds.
“The changing of the hard currencies especially dollars has political motivations and was intentionally coined to suppress [the] economy of south Sudan. This is not the first time it is happening. They have done a lot in the past but [… ] not to this extent”, said the minister.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36049
That’s all folks.
Where are we on the path to war in Sudan?
On the way!! Right close to the wall, but there’re still some chances to make a desperate U turn.
First of all, the discussions between Misseriya and Dinka:
Quote:
Abyei’s Misseriya slam SPLM position over their voting rights, Ethiopia talks falter
"Any discussion between the two parties does not allow peaceful coexistence as priority because SPLM has never allowed it. SPLM leaders are not interested in any peaceful dialogue. They are always interested in division and demarcation of borders. They are the one who brought this division. They are the one who brought borders which have never been there, said Hassan denying having had borders with Dinka Ngok. We have never had borders with Dinka Ngok. They have never demanded drawing borders. We have never been divided because we have always been one and the same family. It is the SPLM which came with it and it is now the one working against peaceful coexistence between us and the Dinka Ngok. They have not given any chance to initiate dialogue on how to live together as brothers and sisters," Musa said. Musa, (is) a leader from one of the “Awelad umran” branch of the Misseriya tribe said they would not create instability but will use all means to ensure that they are able to vote in the referendum.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36531
Quote:
New Proposals to Overcome Abyei Disputes
The international mediators presented another two proposals to Abyei negotiating parties
The first proposal stipulates that Abye belongs to the south directly and to give the Messairiyya the right of pasture.
The other proposed dividing Abyei into two areas (one northerner and the second southerner).
Informed sources told (smc) that the NCP party rejected the first proposal, affirming that the negotiations are still continuing to discuss the second proposal.
The parties to the negotiations formed specialized committees to discuss all the issues related to the post referendum issues including Abyei.
Mediators expressed fears on the consequences of the referendum delay due to the SPLM inflexibility.
http://www.sudanvisiondaily.com/modu...icle&sid=61410
Speaker: Conformity on Abyei, Demarcation Crucial for Referendum
National Assembly Speaker, Ahmed Ibrahim El-Tahir affirmed that south Sudan referendum scheduled to be conducted on the 9th of next January necessitates conformity between the CPA partners on Abyei and demarcation issues.
He criticized the SPLM trend to limit Abyei referendum voting on Dinka Ngok, considering that as a violation to Abyei Protocol and the PCA ruling.
He added that Abyei is a geographical area and all its inhabitants are eligible for voting according to the Protocol.
http://www.sudanvisiondaily.com/modu...icle&sid=61417
All the trick with a good narrative is to have everybody on the same line, singing the same song. And Khartoum is pretty good at it. Also, in a very smart move, they did wait for SPLM to make the mistake to show its carts and Salvaa Kiir to state that the referendum was only meant to achieve sessession while it is written black on white that both parties will try to make union attractive.
Once again: a good narrative and weak political adversary and you end up in the legal camp of the good guys. Still doesn’t mean you are a good guy, but…
Then the idea of a fair vote and of its importance:
Quote:
Bashir accuses Sudan’s SPLM of reneging on peace accord, warns of possible conflict
Sudan official news agency (SUNA) quoted Bashir as telling participants at an emergency Arab League summit in Libya that he regrets what he described as "reneging" by the ex-Southern rebel group on the obligation stipulated in the peace accord by declaring that it is working for the separation option.
The Saudi foreign minister Saud Al-Faisal echoed Bashir’s assertions on the importance for having a fair vote in the South.
“Sudan, a member of the Arab League, is facing the threat of division. No Arab League member can justify its neutral stand on the issue. We have to support Sudan to overcome these dangers,” Al-Faisal said.
Prince Saud opposed the division of Sudan, saying it would not serve the interests of any party. “In our opinion neither the interest of Sudan nor those of the rival parties can be achieved by the dangerous move of division,” he pointed out.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36544
Well, If I remember not too badly, the Arab league is far from being the House of Democracy… But still a fair and transparent vote is requested for the others.
Once again, before you go to war, prepare the land by explaining how the adversary is not playing fair. You may gain some hearts and minds but that’s not the point. You make the public opinion, at least yours, forget how much you actually are what you are claiming the adversary is.
And finally you reject all reasonable solutions because the neutral power trying to make you turn away from the path of war is a bad guy who is actually trying to implement the law and not just use legal arguments as a narrative to justify war:
Quote:
South Sudan President calls for deployment of UN troops at north-south border
"He [Kiir] set out quite a powerful case for why the referendum had to go ahead on time and the fact that he felt [the] referendum would end up [with] a vote for separation," Britain’s UNSC ambassador Mark Lyall Grant was quoted by Reuters, describing what Kiir had told envoys during a meeting in the southern capital Juba on Wednesday.
"He was not going to declare UDI (a unilateral declaration of independence). But if there is a delay, a politically induced delay by the NCP for the referendum, then it might be necessary for the south to hold their own referendum," he added.
Kiir who is also Sudan’s First Vice President of Sudan has in recent days stepped up his rhetoric saying that he will personally choose secession over unity, something the NCP says is a violation of the CPA which calls on both sides to make unity an attractive option.
Senior NCP official Rabie Abdulatti told Reuters Kiir’s words were unacceptable and said Khartoum would not accept the result of an independence vote organised by the south on its own.
"Nobody would recognize it. This is against CPA. Everything about its implementation should be agreed by the two partners."
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36526
Quote:
Khartoum rejects deployment of UN troops on north-south Sudan border
Sudanese officials rejected the deployment of United Nations peacekeepers on the border between the northern and southern Sudan saying such request is unacceptable and contrary to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA).
On Sunday Ibrahim Ghandoor, the headof political secretary at the ruling National Congress Party echoed Karti’s position saying his party rejects any measure not included in the CPA.
"Sudan is still one country and it is very strange that a part of the state asks for international troops without the consent or agreement of the federal government," he said.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36550
Quote:
NCP Criticizes SPLM Call for UN Troops Deployment along North-south Border
NCP Political Secretary, Prof. Ibrahim Ghandour said that the request submitted by Salva Kiir Mayardit is strange and asked how come he calls for international troops while he is part of the government without any agreement with the GoNU.
He added that the UN might not respond to the call pointing out that there are UNMIS troops according to the CPA with limited mandate so the call doesn't coincide with the CPA and moreover Kiir did not consult the GoNU on the issue.
Ghandour considered the SPLM step in transforming 60 thousand SPLA intelligent elements to police forces to protect the referendum process as immature step.
He criticized the separatists’ penetration into the unity support procession in Khartoum considering it as a sabotage attempt which the security authorities dealt with wisely.
http://www.sudanvisiondaily.com/modu...icle&sid=61423
Look how the devil is in the details. First you start with a fact: Sudan is still one country. And then you end up with propaganda: 60 000 policemen are intelligence officers on the ground. To end up with a grave breach: this is sabotage attempt.
Some are dreaming of 60 000 intelligence officer on in the field to monitor a vote. And others of 60 000 saboteurs ready to act in just a clap.
Finally, on the COIN front:
Quote:
SPLA rebel General Athor welcomes South Sudan president’s amnesty
Speaking to Sudan Tribune on Saturday, Nyuon commended decision of the president and urged the officers to return.
“The decision taken by the president is an excellent [...] wise and unifying decision,” said Nyuon.
The BBC noted that the report coincided with the visit of the United Nations Security Council and that the move could be seen as a way to show visiting diplomats the south’s seriousness to provide security ahead of the January’s referendum on southern independence.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36545
Athor is really good. He basically managed to win is rebellion (and not insurgency as he did not take power nor represented almost anyone) against the elections.
All this in burning the land and showing enough power to be taken as a real threat while SPLA have just been unable to simply fright him. Pure Sun Tzu strategy applied to a Clausewitz end: impose your views to the opponent in being deterent enough to not have to really fight. Is that really the future of war? :eek:
Are those guys serious about going to war?
Cause for peace, everybody agrees: they are not!
Quote:
UN to beef-up troop presence at "hotspots" on Sudan’s North-South borders
"We will increase our presence but only in some hotspots," UN peacekeeping chief Alain Le Roy told reporters after a UNSC meeting on Sudan.
U.S. ambassador at the Susan Rice said that UNSC members had been "skeptical" that a force along the entire border could be organized.
"Most council members are skeptical, to say the least, of the feasibility of a force that could line the entirety of the border," Rice told reporters. "Troops don’t exist, it couldn’t be constituted quickly enough."
"But there is serious discussion of alternative models that might focus on those areas along the border that are most vulnerable or at high risk of violence, and where civilians may be most at risk," she added.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36600
Yesterday it was an idea, rejected by Khartoum.
UNSC may authorize limited buffer zones on Sudan’s North-South borders
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36589
Today it’s a small scale innactive force spread all over the border in hot spots… I love the concept of hot spots. It does fix your troops and makes sure tat if something happens you are just were you are not needed!
The idea of PMC is such case may look attractive but who to contract?
First you have to have an agreement of the host nation (Not that easy).
Then an agreement of the security council (even less easy)
And finally you have to recruite 2 or 3 full batallion... At private enerprise cost. Just not fundable.
And even if you manage to get all this: the rules of engagement and recruitement will be so complexe and stupid that you will end up with a force which would be even less effective than the UN. (And the UN force will be completely ineffective in terms of combat capacity, everybody knows it).
But the best is to come:
Quote:
South Sudan will have its own army even if Sudan remains united – SPLM official
In an interview with the SPLA head of communications, Brig. Gen. Malaak Ayuen Ajok, on South Sudan TV minister Nyaba commended the CPA, which he said was different from previous peace agreements signed between north and south in the past because it retained the SPLA as a separate army.
“We would have our own army, our foreign minister, which is now the regional cooperation […] even in unity,”
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36593
One country, 2 populace and 2 armies… A new vision of the CvC trinity? Certainly not!
South is so eager to be independent that they just forget some small details like: finalising the border with North…
Quote:
Sudan NCP calls for postponement of Abyei referendum
"It is very obvious that right now it is not possible to hold the referendum in Abyei on January 9. The two parties have agreed on this regard", said Al-Dirdiri Mohamed Ahmed, a senior NCP member who is in charge of Abyei file on Thursday.
US Ambassador to the United Nations told the meeting that the Security Council delegation during its visit to Sudan last week held a meeting with civil society and religious officials. "The mission members had heard more concerns over meeting the tight timetable for the referendum, especially as regarded arrangements in the contended Abyei area, and more concerns that the north was "beating the drums of war", Ms. Rice said.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36599
Why only North? South is doing exactly the same!
But my favorit is that one:
Quote:
Gen. Tanginye becomes latest southern figure to defect to SPLM
A senior army general previously incorporated into the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF), has arrived in Juba for the first time since 2006 to announce that he is joining the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), which controls the South of the country.
Gabriel Tangginya who has been accused of inciting violence against the semi-autonomous Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS), announced his defection to the ex-Southern rebel group on Thursday after meetings with GoSS President Salva Kiir.
He also commended President Kiir for his declared amnesty to all the armed groups, assuring that all the other senior officers who have remained behind were in the process of reconciling themselves with the southern government.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36591
The guy burned the place at least 2 times since 2006 and now is coming back because of the amnesty…
Can this really work?
Amnesty laws usually come after the peace has been achieve and the conflict ended, not defore the pick of the legal confrontation that may lead to war.
Yes peace is often made of bites and piece… But up to which point? Actually the question is not just rethorical. Once you have bought the peace spoiler what stopes them to do it again and again?
That’s why normally you pass amnesty laws after the resolution of a conflict, once you have reach the final political end. NOT to reach that end!
War in 2011 - US Involvement ?
What do you think of this article, Southern Sudan - the Four Theses, just posted on the SWJBlog feed ?
LTC Talley's conclusions:
Quote:
Conclusion
The purpose of this paper is to address what I felt to be three critical elements missing from current discussions and analysis of the situation in Southern Sudan. To recap, they are:
1. A full appreciation of why the Government of Sudan has no choice but to fight – and, most disturbing, why they assess that they will win.‘
2. A sense that the Southern Sudanese appear to be misreading U.S. commitment for the process as a commitment to their cause.
3. The lack of strategic analysis guiding U.S. involvement; in particular, the lack of any effort to extrapolate the likely outcome of U.S. intervention, to analyze the costs associated with that intervention, and to assess the risks to our national interests.
My sense is that the U.S. has been led down a path leading to armed intervention by a values-based advocacy community whose primary motivation is to ensure the U.S. does something to stop bad things from happening. I am particularly troubled by how easily this advocacy community suggests that U.S. involvement in Southern Sudan can lead to a similar involvement in Darfur. The unspoken premise is that, with just a little effort and commitment from the U.S., everything will work out alright. As I have worked through the likely evolution of the official U.S. policy decision, I have come to the conclusion that this policy is prodding the U.S. into a war it is neither prepared for nor willing to fight.
The greatest danger is not that the U.S. military will lose on the battlefield, but that the U.S. will serve as midwife to a failed state – and, in so doing, cause irreparable harm to our real geo-strategic interests in Africa. I believe the President of the United States has reached a critical decision point. Before he chooses to continue with the current official policy, which I believe to have shown will lead to war and ruin, he should pause and the questions, ―is this really a good idea? and ―are there any other viable options?
As an ancient (very ancient) student in the "Never Again, but ..." School, my vote is negat. I see no reasonable "but" justifying US military intervention.
So, Marc, what are the "other viable options" ?
Regards
Mike
What are the other alternatives?...
The question is simple but answering to it seems just impossible.
First of all it requires responding to the question: is a peaceful separation between South and North possible?
The answer is yes, naturally. Strong diplomatic pressing on Khartoum could do the trick. But this will not answer the question because it’s the future of North and South that are to be addressed.
One of the very well presented argument in LtCol Talley paper is the wrong believe in USA of the evil nature of Bashir regime.
Khartoum is a US ally in GWOT. It is also the rampart Egypt is supporting to stop Islamic opposition in its territory. And Egypt is an ally of USA.
So separation between North and South has to be smooth for North.
An idea that many southerners are not ready to support, especially in the Diaspora and among Human Rights activist; especially about Darfur. (George my friend… You should probably have staid home! Would have been easier for many of us!)
It’s also an idea that GoSS is not ready to support. After 50 years of struggle and 25 years in the bush for those in power… No way, they stay poor.
So the solution could be to overflow the place with aid. Is it feasible for the US treasure? Not so sure. And that’s exactly in that breach that Arab league countries have already put a foot.
Never the less, if US do not want Khartoum to go for war in order to distract its populace from political opposition, this will cost a lot of money.
But economical development will certainly not be sufficient to preserve Bashir regime. And that is where it becomes fuzzy. In the end, USA will certainly have to increase their military/security support to Khartoum. Not just for the sake of supporting a non democratic regime but also to prevent China to increase its grip on Sudan.
Cause all is about China vs USA.
So the first thing will be to drop the legal ban over Sudan to allow US companies to invest in all sectors in North Sudan, especially oil and security.
Then an in depth lobbying in Sudan will be necessary for US companies to invest in Sudan.
Arab league countries have already started to invest in agriculture. This is clearly one of the key alternative sectors. But the road is long to bring Sudan up to the needed standards. Recently, Khartoum failed to export livestock products to North Africa countries because of their low quality. Another alternative is to work indirectly with allies such as Egypt to strength North Sudan while USA are directly involved into supporting South.
Secondly, Darfur crisis has to be settled in a way that will affect neither Khartoum, neither Juba, neither N’djamena nor the various rebel groups. Let say a long and difficult challenge. Such settlement of the crisis will affect the US on the international stage because this will diminish the ICC credibility and reinforce the idea that Africa is a continent of impunity.
This seems dumb but this will weaken the actual US president and reinforce the impunity in other African countries. This will even reinforce the idea that China is the new perfect match for most of the African powers.
So promoting a smooth transition seems to be inaccessible. Not that it is not feasible but not really possible for too many reasons that are not in the hands of any external power. Especially western powers.
On the other hand, a war in South without US involvement in South will have extended consequences. The solution is that case could be the involvement of Uganda and other regional powers such as South Africa. Uganda is a long time SPLA friend and Salva Kiir is taking numerous contacts with South Africa.
And leave Darfur containment to the Chadian.
This looks like the most reasonable solution. But then it brings the question: how to not turn this in a new African first world war as DRC did in its time with troops of 7 countries involved in the conflict?
Anyone with a better understanding or option for the alternative solution is hightly welcome! :)
Murder on the dance floor
During the week end, the SPLA and the SAF clashed. They exchanged fire and are accusing each other to have started the mambo jambo…
Quote:
North, South Sudan armies trade accusations over fresh clashes in border areaThe two parties agreed that their troops clashed in the morning of Saturday but the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) says that Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) soldiers penetrated inside Upper Nile state and the latter says SPLA troops attacked them inside Sennar state.
Southern Sudan army spokesperson Kuol Diem Kuol, said Sunday that troops from northern Sudan army ambushed SPLA soldiers and returned back to their positions.
"They clashed with about 10 of our soldiers and wounded one officer and then they ran back to their base," said Kuol.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36793
Another link, (in French, sorry couldn’t get one in English, but I’ll do my best to translate)
Quote:
Nord et Sud s'accusent d'un accrochage armé à la frontière
Les forces de l'Armée populaire de libération du Soudan (SPLA, sudiste) ont "attaqué samedi nos positions dans le secteur de Zemmali, situé à cinq kilomètres du côté nord de la frontière de 1956, dans l'Etat de Sennar", a déclaré tard lundi soir le porte-parole de l'armée soudanaise (nordiste), Sawarmi Khaled Saad, à l'agence officielle Suna.
"L'attaque a duré une heure et nos forces armées ont été en mesure de repousser les assaillants du SPLA du côté sud de la frontière de 1956", date de l'indépendance du Soudan par rapport aux autorités égypto-britanniques, a-t-il ajouté.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...555062019b.7f1
Quote:
North and South accuse each other about a skirmish on the border
The SPLA “attacked our position on Saturday in the area of Zemmali, 5 kilometers north from 1956, in Sennar State” declared Monday evening the SAF speaker, Sawarmi Khaled Saad to SUNA, the official press agency.
“The attack stand for 1 hour and our forces have been able to push back SPLA assailants south of 1956 border”, Sudan independence date according to British Egyptian authorities, he added.
As an immediate result?
Quote:
Obama renews Sudan sanctions
Tommy Vietor, the White House spokesman, said the US hoped Sudan's leaders "will make the urgent and difficult choices necessary to secure peace for the Sudanese people".
"As we work to support these choices, the United States will review the Sudanese government's progress on resolving outstanding [peace agreement] implementation issues as well as other relevant circumstances, to include improving security and humanitarian access in Darfur," he said.
"If the government of Sudan acts to improve the situation on the ground and advance peace, we stand ready to work with Sudan to ensure its rightful place in the international community."
Obama last week stressed the need to go ahead with the vote as scheduled
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/af...135816881.html
This is the first grave breach in the CPA since Abeyi. Are they just tasting water or are we already in the crazy war spiral?
Time will tell. But one thing is sure, the dance has started and there is blood on the dance floor.
A hot week end in a sand box
Quote:
Head of Sudan referendum commission accuse donors of withholding cash
Southern Sudan Referendum Commission (SSRC) Chairperson Mohamed Ibrahim Khalil shows a sample voting card during a news conference at the SSRC headquarters in Khartoum, November 14, 2010 (Reuters)
"They give us finished goods, materials just as you cater for a minor. You don’t give a minor cash in case they should misuse it but give them finished goods and services which, incidentally, we resent," Khalil was quoted as saying by Reuters.
"The party which has not availed us of any usable money so far is the international donors," he added.
Khalil also blasted hiring foreign contractors and experts which in one situation complicated the process rather than facilitate it without seeing if there were competent Sudanese to do the same job. He said they had appointed a U.S. law firm which made incomprehensible regulations based on the referendum law. The commission finally had to find a Sudanese firm to do the job.
"This is an utter waste of money," he said, adding the commission had been delayed by six weeks in moving into its offices because of the delay in funds from the donors.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36944
Viewing how North and South did handel last electoral process, I would just make no comments… It says already a lot!
I would recommend to read this:
Quote:
How U.S. Government Policy Could Push the Country Back Into Civil War.
"The United States must make a credible threat that it will employ retaliatory actions against those who ignite renewed war, perhaps even using missiles to take out strategic targets."
12 November 2010
BY RICHARD WILLIAMSON
Former Sudan Envoy
http://www.gurtong.net/ECM/Editorial...1/Default.aspx
I will also not comment it as it is internal US politic but this shows how important it is for an external powerto have his house in order when it comes to support a foreign country military process.
And finally the big news:
North did bomb sites in Northern Bar El Ghazal! But north to the 1956 border, so technically nothing happened in South Sudan.
The only trick is that no body was prepared for this and it is complicating a little more the relations between North and South as yet Khartoum accuses South to support JEM. In Northern Bar El Ghazal actually…
Quote:
Khartoum’s army bomb South Sudan, targeting Darfur rebels
Colonel Philip Aguer Panyang, official spokesperson for Sudan Peoples’ Liberation Army, on Saturday told Sudan Tribune from the regional capital of Juba that two military aircrafts belonging to the Khartoum-controlled SAF dropped bombs on southern territory in the state of Northern Bahr el Ghazal.
"I am told by our forces on the ground in Northern Bahr el Ghazal that the air attack occurred on Friday. No death causalities have been reported but there are reports that 8 civilians have sustained serious injuries. Some of these victims with light injuries are being nursed in the local clinic in Gok Machar but those with inflicted shrapnel injuries and are at critical conditions have been moved to Aweil civil hospital," explained Panyang.
"We contacted central command of the Sudan Armed Forces yesterday night seeking explanation of why they bombarded our territory. The explanation they gave us in response was that they were pursuing rebel forces. They said it was not their intention to bomb our areas. They were only following routes of the Darfur rebels," explained Panyang.
Sudan Armed Forces spokesperson Al-Sawarmi Khaled, accused the southern Sudan ruling party of supporting JEM saying the southern army (SPLA) evacuated wounded rebels to Juba and to Uganda.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36929
Quote:
SPLM Provides JEM leaders with Training and Medical Treatment
SMC follow-up revealed that the SPLM continued providing support to JEM aiming at creating a buffer zone all over the bordering lines of Bahr El-Ghazal State and causing tensions in that area.
Several meetings were held between a number of JEM and SPLM leaders in the framework of supporting the strategic trends between the two parties to expand the zone of war in Darfur.
Eye witnesses said that the SPLA leaders supervised the evacuation of JEM injured elements after Al-Majrour battle, adding that there contacts between Sulieman Sandal of JEM and SPLM to provide the necessary vehicles to evacuate 46 injured JEM elements from southern Buram area.
Sources affirmed that there is coordination between the SPLM and JEM through which the former provides support to the latter to continue its rebellion against the government.
Informed sources pointed out that the SPLM is conducting consultations to support JEM with (120) military vehicles besides opening several training camps and supporting the movement in recruiting more rebels to bridge the gap in its elements.
The SPLM also promised to expand the support to JEM to continue its war from south Sudan after it is expelled from Chad.
http://www.sudanvisiondaily.com/modu...icle&sid=63364
It’s incredible how borders can be important! Cause SPLA is saying it happened on our soil while technically it happened north to the 1956 border recognised as the CPA border.
Anyways, all eyes were on the oil fields while the war may start on Darfur border.
Abyei… The land of the discord
Few days ago, the UN secretary general was alarmed by drums of war beats…
Apparently he was not heard in South Sudan:
Quote:
South Sudan president says Abyei belongs to Dinka Ngok
Addressing the closing session of a two day conference on the ‘urgent popular demand for implementation of the Abyei referendum’ in the south’s capital Juba Salva Kiir said that "Abyei belongs to the Ngok Dinka". He further said the SPLM would not ink an agreement on outstanding issues related to Sudan’s assets, water or oil without concluding a deal on Abyei with the National Congress Party (NCP).
The former South African president Thabo Mbeki and Chairman of the African Union High Level Implementation Panel for Sudan told the UN Security Council on Tuesday that the President Omer Al-Bashir and his first deputy will meet during next week of 22 November to discuss Abyei referendum.
Mebeki further stressed that both parties have agreed to "do everything possible to reach an agreement on this issue as a matter of urgency".
Regarding the future of the cattle herder nomads in the area, Kiir said that South Sudan would be able to provide services to members of the Misseriya tribe in Abyei but would not give them the right to own the land.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36971
Quote:
We are ready to defend Abyei if attacked says Kiir
- President Salva Kiir has warned National Congress Party not turn Abyei into another Kashmir, and “if they do we are ready for it”. Addressing the opening of the Abyei Ngok Dinka consultative conference at Southern Sudan Legislative Assembly in Juba, the president said “people are telling me that we cannot return to war because of Abyei.
My position is Abyei will not be left behind”. He added, “we have been lying to the people of Abyei until the lies became useless, we cannot give a piece of land to Misseriya. Nothing kills a man beside the land this is our position, don’t think that the NCP is powerful that they can take the land by force. If they attack us we have the right to self defence”.
“Let me assure that SPLM will take the lead on resolving the Abyei issue. We abhor violence. The youth should not take the law into their hands”. Said the President. He said that the people of Abyei are not registering together with south Sudan because the NCP has delayed formation of the Abyei Referendum Commission. “We failed to establish the commission.
http://jubapost.org/index.php?option...news&Itemid=67
Once again, SPLM is playing the ethnical line (So does Khartoum) while the issue is elsewhere:
Quote:
Standoff over Abyei dominates consultative discussions between peace partners
The senior official of the south’s ruling party says their partner in the CPA is attempting many bargaining tactics to get the best deal it can for before the likely breakup of the country.
"Officials from the National Congress Party are trying their best. They are knocking all doors in attempt to bargain with interest that we split the national debts, share oil resources as stipulated in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement even if the south secedes," he explained.
Under the CPA the north and south split revenues from the south’s oil fields were split 50-50.
He also accused the NCP of attempting to draw the north-south border so that more of Sudan’s oil is north of the as yet un-demarcated border.
"They are also trying to ensure that north-south borders are drawn in their favor so that it brings more oil into the north and continue removing oil in the north from reservoirs that run into the south," he explained.
The former senior member of the NCP, who defected to the SPLM in 2007, says all eyes of his former party are fixed on Abyei because of its oil.
“The cause of all stalemates is Abyei. The NCP sees Abyei as nothing but wealth. This is why they have not been able to reach [a] compromise with our team involved in discussions over the issue of this region because they know Abyei is their last pocket. They are fearing economical collapse,” said Mathok.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36982
November 22... Might be the first official day of peace... or war...