On December 15, 2013, gunfire erupted in Juba and led to a conflict that has raged throughout South Sudan for several weeks. Fleeing, fighting and bloodshed, reminiscent of the recent civil war, will carry long-term consequences on the country’s development.
The current unrest began as a political struggle between forces loyal to President Salvir Kiir and those loyal to former vice-president Riek Machar. Kiir accused Machar of an attempted coup, while Machar blames Kiir for firing on forces loyal to the former vice-president. Two opposing political groups emerged and proceeded to battle one another, particularly in Jonglei and the Upper Nile states. Thousands of civilians have died and over 770,000 have fled their homes. ‘We spent all night running without sleep. We were so tired and thirsty, nowhere to get water. We slept in the bush; a lot of insects bitten us enormously. No showering for many days and wearing same clothes for the last seven days’, said an NGO worker who fled Bor.
Overcrowding and fear
Hundreds of thousands have fled to overcrowded camps where fears of food and water shortages are growing. ‘Number of civilians with acute & emergency food needs in #SouthSudan has risen from 1 million b4 15 Dec to well over 3 million’ (Tweet from UNOCHA South Sudan). As Kiir is of the dominant Dinka tribe and Machar a Nuer, there has been some ethnic-targeted violence. But it is believed the main cause of the conflict is political.
One former government minister in South Sudan ascribes the continuing civil war to the ‘extreme militarism and lack of political ideology and organisation’ of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement. It failed to build democratic institutions, but promoted ‘Dinka ethnic dominance in all aspects of social, economic and political life’. Thus the South Sudan government operated with no programme or objectives. Its only institutions were ethnic and regional. So its leadership cannot meet the aspirations of all the people of South Sudan.
The future trajectory
Although a ceasefire was signed on January 23, 2014, the situation remains tense. Civilians are not returning home. In the absence of a common enemy (the North), internal disunity is rife. The former government minister insists that South Sudan needs a depoliticised army, a police force, a civil service and local government. The Episcopal Church of the Sudan (ECS) must play a key role in bringing peace and reconciliation. The church holds a unique and influential position within South Sudan, trusted more than governments and reaching among various ethnic groups. In a statement before Christmas the ECS said: ‘Reconciliation is needed between the political leaders. Violence is not an acceptable way of resolving disputes. This must be done in a peaceful and civilised manner. Reconciliation is at the heart of the church’s ministry, a key gospel value, and so we offer ourselves as mediators’.
AID
Anglican International Development (AID) began in 2008, in response to concerns from the African anglican church about the ECS and the whole of South Sudan. AID has a long-term vision for South Sudan and remains deeply committed to transforming lives devastated by conflict.
AID continues to run microfinance and sanitation projects in Juba, which is relatively stable. It continues to fundraise for a healthcare project to build an Institute of Health Sciences (IHS). This will train desperately needed healthcare professionals and help to improve the dire health statistics of the country. The IHS was planned to be in Bor town. But, during particularly intense violence, Bor has changed hands several times. So AID is rethinking the location and timescales of this project.
‘The whole of Bor fled to the UN camp. Looting, killing everywhere. Looting and vandalising [all the UN and NGO offices]. Air-conditioners on the road, toys from UNICEF, coloured chalk, small blackboards for the kids to learn, lot of agricultural seeds strewn onto the street, reams of A4 paper... a horrible sight.’ German Fisheries, John Gerang University, Bor town.
Justin Welby in Juba
In an expression of solidarity with the suffering church of South Sudan, the Archbishop of Canterbury visited Juba on January 30. Justin Welby said of his visit: ’The South Sudanese church is an example to us all in its consistent speaking with one voice for peace, for unity and for an ending to the violence so horrifically perpetrated against so many people. With the South Sudanese church leaders, I urge political differences to be set aside for the sake of the urgent task of bringing healing and reconciliation. The one thing I’ve learned over many, many years of working in conflicts is that reconciliation is done by the people locally – outsiders do not understand enough; but what we can do, and we promise to do, is to accompany and support those [like Archbishop Bishop Daniel Deng Bul] who are leading the reconciliation locally’.
