As Sudan’s Key Referendum Approaches, North-South Border Issues Loom
Whether the January 2011 referendum delivers unity or secession, there are significant risks of escalating tensions and renewed violence along the North-South border. USIP commissioned Concordis International to undertake a conflict assessment of the dynamics related to the North-South border in Sudan, identifying local and national drivers of conflict and how they interact.
Event Summary
As Sudan prepares for a historic referendum in January 2011 on whether Southern Sudan will remain part of the country, a recent panel at the United States Institute of Peace found the country’s future unclear and complex.
Ongoing problems in Sudan include the ongoing crisis in Darfur, a fragile 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that ended the decades-long North-South civil war, and incidents of local violence in the southern and central parts of the country, according to the panel. Furthermore, as the 2011 referendum approaches, potential problems along the border of northern and southern Sudanese states have not been resolved.
A panel convened by USIP on September 8 discussed recent findings of a USIP-commissioned report on Sudan’s North-South border issues. The report, compiled by Concordis International is informed by the European Union-funded Cross Border Relations Project. Panelists included Christopher Milner, of Concordis International; Benedetta de Alessi, from the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London; Martin Pratt, from the International Boundaries Research Unit at Durham University; and USIP’s Andrew Blum as the panel moderator.
“By highlighting key conflict-prone areas along the border, and analyzing the conflict dynamics in those areas, the report will assist domestic and international actors in crafting targeted responses to address sources of instability, before, during, and especially after the referendum process is completed,” said Blum, a program officer for USIP’s grant program. “The report will also inform future grant-making of the USIP grant program, which sees stability along the border as key to the stability of Sudan.”
USIP’s Priority Grant Program in Sudan has worked since 2006 to support organizations in Sudan on issues of peace and conflict. In 2011 the Priority Grant Program in Sudan will launch the North-South Border Initiative, which will seek to address drivers of conflict in this area and help Sudanese actors manage sources of instability. As part of the launch of this initiative, USIP commissioned Concordis to undertake a conflict assessment of the dynamics related to the North-South border in Sudan, identifying local and national drivers of conflict and how they interact.
“The report aims to address the situation,” said Milner, who conducted his research with Sudanese counterparts from the University of Juba. “The goal is to think about the principles and propositions that they think will make the border work.”
In addition to this priority grant program in Sudan, USIP conducts capacity-building workshops to help manage and prevent violent conflict in border regions. The most volatile are the Three Areas: Abyei, Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile. USIP works with state officials and civil society members from Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan states to support Popular Consultation. Popular Consultation is a CPA-mandated process, in which the two states can seek to renegotiate political, administrative and constitutional arrangements with the central government. USIP recently presented possible post-referendum scenarios in a Peace Brief, “Scenarios for Sudan's Future, Revisited,” by Jon Temin, a senior program officer at USIP, and Jaïr van der Lijn, a senior research fellow at the Clingendael Institute. USIP also holds peacebuilding workshops across Sudan. In July, USIP’s Jacqueline H. Wilson and Nina Sughrue joined the Boston-based, Sudan-registered group My Sister’s Keeper, in conducting a workshop for women in the Southern city of Juba on peacebuilding and stability.
Coinciding with the referendum on whether the North and South will remain united, the residents of Abyei will vote on the same day whether to remain in the North or become part of Bahr el Ghazal State in the South.
Concordis investigated perceptions of those living in several of the border states through meetings, interviews and fieldwork. The research focused on how people felt about the North-South border and their understanding of what the referendum would mean for their communities. De Alessi said many people living in border areas do not understand the difference between land use and ownership. In addition, migration is an issue in areas with nomadic and fixed communities, and the referendum confuses people who wish to know what establishing a clear border will accomplish.
“There is a gap between the local and national perception along the border,” de Alessi said.
De Alessi said the national border agreement must not overshadow local interests. Oil is a major driver of conflict along the border. Northern and Southern Sudanese have claimed the same agricultural and natural resource-rich land. A number of Sudanese spoke with Concordis about attempts to resolve land issues legally, but there are currently no legal processes to resolve property ownership issues because clear borders do not exist. In these areas, disputes concerning land ownership result in heavy militarization.
Milner said the southern states are still weak from the civil war and many people have been living in poverty. Many Sudanese who live in the state of Abyei feel northern militias have pushed them southward away from their land and natural resources. Sudanese officials have yet to define a border creation process, even after consulting English and Egyptian colonial maps, he said.
“Ultimately, these communities are saying they want clear referendums,” Milner said.
More information is needed to dispel rumors. Rumors have circulated that the border will be lined with an electric fence. In reality, the government has made no permanent plans for a fixed border. In the Concordis report, those interviewed found it difficult to gather accurate information concerning the border. Milner said he hopes the report will “provide much needed information” to the Sudanese as well as international groups working in Sudan. The panel said it hopes more progress can be made as more accurate information is made available.
Pratt said the conflict between the North and South is similar to other conflicts around the world. Acknowledging that a clear border seems to be the first step for Sudan, defining a border is only the beginning in the “delineation and demarcation process,” he said. For residents living along the border to feel their interests are considered, there must be effective border management and an inclusive border creation process. If borders are created as zones rather than lines, the North and South could share resources more easily. Under the CPA, both regions already share nationwide oil profits.
The panel agreed the referendum will change the face of Sudan. They said local interests must be considered to ensure that border issues do not spark broader North-South conflicts. Regardless of what is decided in January 2011, clear North-South border issues must be resolved to prevent potential trouble in the future. At the same time, beginning a delineation and demarcation process could present opportunities for greater peacebuilding at the local levels along the North-South Sudan border.
Speakers
- Benedetta de Alessi
School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London - Amir Idris
Fordham University - Christopher Milner
Concordis International - Martin Pratt
Durham University - Andrew Blum, Moderator
United States Institute of Peace
