• Home »  News »  Briefing Room: Sudan

Briefing Room: Sudan

By peterguest | Published: 17 January, 2011

Polling in a referendum on the independence of southern Sudan is complete, and appears to show that the autonomous region’s population have come out strongly in favour of secession. At the time of writing, figures were not available, but all indications pointed towards a majority “yes” vote on independence. The poll has been approved by international observers.

The referendum was a condition of a 2005 ceasefire deal, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, which ended a cycle of civil violence that began on the eve of united Sudan’s independence in 1956. Since the signing of the CPA, the south has been run effectively as an autonomous province, with a government in Juba taking on many of the day-to-day functions of state.

The US, UK and other international players staked money and diplomatic capital on the safe passage of the poll, the result of which took on a degree of inevitability as the date drew closer. While “making unity attractive” was part of the original CPA agreement, diplomatic sources in the country acknowledge that vilification of Khartoum over its role in genocide in the western Darfur region – which led to its president, Omar Al-Bashir, being indicted for crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court – and its perceived historic support for Islamist terrorism led to waning international support for a one Sudan solution. Equally, the death of the charismatic leader of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement, John Garang, in a helicopter crash in 2005, reduced the possibility of a negotiated single state.

Mr Garang, who became vice president following the ceasefire, was known to have sympathy for a “one country, two governments” solution. His colleagues in the SPLA identify themselves almost exclusively with separation.

The North seemed also to be resigned to secession, although it continued to make its presence felt, undermining the autonomous south’s ability to manage itself financially by paying oil revenues in Sudanese pounds, rather than US dollars, cutting the foreign exchange reserves that are vital for running an economy that runs on imports.

Many details of separation remain unresolved. Even the independent south’s name as a sovereign entity is undecided. Perhaps more significantly, there remain questions over how oil revenues will be split between North and South. Many of the oil fields are on the disputed border and in the Abyei province, which held a separate referendum and where violence was reported. Despite this, however, the referendum appeared to run without major incident.

“You’ve seen in the south a unity of purpose around the referendum, which has kind of brushed away, at least temporarily, the tensions and differences that you could see around certain southern parties,” says Jean-Baptiste Gallopin, associate analyst at risk consultancy Control Risks. “Given that there is an overwhelming support for the independence of the south within the south, it’s not surprising that the voting process would go smoothly.

“The north realises that the north and the south rely on each other for the production and transport of oil, it’s not surprising that the north would accommodate southern succession once it appeared to be inevitable.”

After independence, some large questions remain – can a government staffed by former combatants of a 50-year old liberation movement, with little experience in government and with a political legitimacy stemming exclusively from its commitment to delivering independence become a civilian administration capable of building a nation. The developmental challenges in the south are significant. The country has little remaining infrastructure and relies on vastly expensive imports. Capacity in the civil service and security forces is slim and corruption is endemic. An entire generation either fought or fled to camps in neighbouring countries, meaning that, although young, the workforce is largely lacking formal education. Investment is sorely needed, but outside of the oil sector there is little of scale on the horizon.

Furthermore, the southern consensus, which existed around opposition to northern rule, could collapse once that shared goal is met.

“The unity and the message behind the current good political climate in the south is really driven by the fact that the north is still perceived as an enemy and everyone in the south supports independence,” Mr Gallopin says. “The issues are postponed until after independence… there are still very deep rifts within the SPLM between various warlords with different ethnic constituencies. This is something we will see re-emerge in the south once it is independent.”

While economically the north of the country is stronger, its own political stability and the position of Mr Bashir as its leader could be in question post-succession. Khartoum is under sanctions and its president remains under a warrant from the ICC, and despite promises to relax certain strictures and write off some of the country’s debt mountain in exchange for cooperation over the referendum, the country remains an international pariah.

Although he has retained power and limited the influence of opposition parties in the North, the loss of the south will not be accepted by all factions within Mr Bashir’s own National Congress Party. His survival could depend on his ability to demonstrate that the deal with the international community, as well as an eventual oil sharing deal with Juba, ultimately benefit Khartoum.

“Bashir is a bit cornered, in a sense, by both the opposition – which is not in itself very significant but is growing more vocal – as well as by elements within the regime itself that are hostile to southern succession,” Mr Gallopin says. “If he succeeds in showing the constituencies within the north that it is possible for Sudan to reap the benefits of a return into the international mainstream, I would say, then he will be able to consolidate his power once again.

“If he fails to convince NCP constituencies that Sudan hasn’t been weakened by the Southern succession… then he will be threatened for sure. There are elements within the northern government that are opposed to his line. It’s really a crucial period for the north.”