The destructive armed conflict in Darfur continues unabated despite regional and international
efforts to put an end to it. At present, there is no negotiated political resolution of the conflict in
sight. This happens despite the political negotiations for a peaceful settlement of the conflict
under the banner of the Inter-Sudanese Peace Talks on Darfur, which are currently taking place
in the Nigerian capital, Abuja. For the third consecutive month, representatives of the
government of Sudan and the main Darfur insurgent groups i.e. the Sudan Liberation
Movement/Army (SLM/A) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), are meeting at the
seventh round of talks to reach a negotiated political agreement that puts an end to the armed
conflict in the region. The ongoing process is substantially flawed and fruitless. The previous six
rounds of political negotiations that started in Addis Ababa in July 2004 under the auspices of the
African Union (AU) have made very limited progress on some minor issues. The adoption of the
Declaration of Principles on the Resolution of the Sudanese Conflict in Darfur in July 2005 is yet
to be followed by a real break-through in its implementation. By all accounts, the progress made
at the negotiations is marginal and disproportionate with the extent and magnitude of the
humanitarian crisis in the region and its devastating effects on millions of civilians who are being
held hostage by political bargaining.
Read more
Tuesday, 13 April 2010
Lessons Learned from Peace Operations in Africa
There have been 40 peace operations deployed to 14 African states since 2000.
◆◆ To be successful, peace operations must be part of an effective political strategy and peace process, not
a substitute for them.
◆◆ Policymakers need to move beyond a preoccupation with the number of personnel deployed for
each mission and focus on what capabilities are needed to generate the desired political effects.
◆◆Maintaining legitimacy is a crucial part of achieving success.
H i g h l i g h t s
Read more
◆◆ To be successful, peace operations must be part of an effective political strategy and peace process, not
a substitute for them.
◆◆ Policymakers need to move beyond a preoccupation with the number of personnel deployed for
each mission and focus on what capabilities are needed to generate the desired political effects.
◆◆Maintaining legitimacy is a crucial part of achieving success.
H i g h l i g h t s
Read more
Friday, 9 April 2010
Sudan Issue Brief: Symptoms and Causes: Insecurity and Underdevelopment in Eastern Equatoria
Eastern Equatoria state (EES) is one of the most volatile and conflict-prone states in Southern Sudan. An epicentre of the civil war (1983–2005), EES saw intense fighting between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA), as well numerous armed groups supported by both sides, leaving behind a legacy of landmines and unexploded ordnance, high numbers of weapons in civilian hands, and shattered social and community relations. EES has also experienced chronic food insecurity, a lack of basic services, and few economic opportunities. Cattle rustling, armed robbery, and banditry are endemic. With little or no official security presence in many areas of the state, protracted cycles of revenge attacks over natural resources, and land in particular, are common. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), which ended the civil war, did not result in a tangible peace dividend for most EES communities; in fact, the return of war-era refugees to ancestral villages and the recent arrival of internally displaced persons (IDPs) from other parts of Sudan have exacerbated tensions over land and resources.
Read more
Read more
Sudan – No Easy Ways Ahead
Towards the end of the six-year interim period defined in the Comprehensive
Peace Agreement (CPA), Sudan is potentially sliding into yet another crisis. The
general elections in April – the first in 24 years – represent a rare test of confidence for the country’s incumbent elites. For many observers, however, the
elections are merely a prelude to the referendum on the future status of South
Sudan scheduled for early 2011. Both the general elections and the referendum come at the end of a transitional period that has, in many ways, been more about stagnation than about transition.
The implementation of the CPA has often been delayed and was marred by a lack
of trust between its signatories: the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s
Liberation Movement (SPLM). As a consequence, the agreement has largely failed
to realize democratic transformation and to make the unity of the country attractive.
Instead, political tensions in the run-up to the elections indicate that older
conflicts still persist, and that the referendum will only reconfigure challenges.
The already fragile situation could easily trigger a new outbreak of violence
Read more
Peace Agreement (CPA), Sudan is potentially sliding into yet another crisis. The
general elections in April – the first in 24 years – represent a rare test of confidence for the country’s incumbent elites. For many observers, however, the
elections are merely a prelude to the referendum on the future status of South
Sudan scheduled for early 2011. Both the general elections and the referendum come at the end of a transitional period that has, in many ways, been more about stagnation than about transition.
The implementation of the CPA has often been delayed and was marred by a lack
of trust between its signatories: the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s
Liberation Movement (SPLM). As a consequence, the agreement has largely failed
to realize democratic transformation and to make the unity of the country attractive.
Instead, political tensions in the run-up to the elections indicate that older
conflicts still persist, and that the referendum will only reconfigure challenges.
The already fragile situation could easily trigger a new outbreak of violence
Read more
Saturday, 27 March 2010
Beyond the Fragile Peace between Ethiopia and Eritrea: Averting new war
The Ethiopia-Eritrea impasse carries serious risk of a new war and is a major source of instability in the Horn of Africa, most critically for Somalia. Following
Ethiopia’s refusal to accept virtual demarcation of the border by the now disbanded Ethiopia-Eritrea Boundary Commission (EEBC), Asmara unilaterally implemented it and forced out the UN peacekeepers (UNMEE), significantly raising the stakes and shattering the status quo. Its insistence on recovering territory the Commission awarded it – Badme in particular – could lead to unilateral military action by either side but is only one of several war scenarios. The Security Council and key individual states (the U.S., in particular) must recognise the dangers of their inaction and advance a reconfigured political process with new determination if there is to be a change in the calculations of the parties, who appear to be dangerously content with trying to maintain a level of simmering but unpredictable hostility.
Read more
Ethiopia’s refusal to accept virtual demarcation of the border by the now disbanded Ethiopia-Eritrea Boundary Commission (EEBC), Asmara unilaterally implemented it and forced out the UN peacekeepers (UNMEE), significantly raising the stakes and shattering the status quo. Its insistence on recovering territory the Commission awarded it – Badme in particular – could lead to unilateral military action by either side but is only one of several war scenarios. The Security Council and key individual states (the U.S., in particular) must recognise the dangers of their inaction and advance a reconfigured political process with new determination if there is to be a change in the calculations of the parties, who appear to be dangerously content with trying to maintain a level of simmering but unpredictable hostility.
Read more
Approaching Reciprocity: The border issue as a symptom
Worldwide, there are approximately 100 boundary disputes between countries. Vast areas of land, sea and maritime coasts push countries into quarrel for territorial claims or possessions. Some areas are even claimed by more than two countries. There can be wide divergence between de facto boundaries, whether by right or not, and de jure, rightfully, boundaries. Most countries reinforce sovereignty claims for different reasons: Colonial inherited conflicts, the exploitation of minerals, agricultural usage, geopolitical attractions such as access to waters, and other significant benefits.
Few countries exercised arm conflicts, but soon sought legal resolution. Countries solve their territorial claims bilaterally, or at the international hearings, or through other means of mediations. For example: Germany and Denmark successfully resolved an age-old boarder dispute (1815 – 2001) of 68 kilometres. Russia and the United States of America agreed on fishing claims in the central Bering Sea, and Botswana was rewarded the disputed islands with Namibia.
For clarity, here are some of the on-going disputes which may impress us with their experiences: Russia and Japan have had their modern border dispute since 1945 over the Kurile Islands. They are four small islands along 1200 km. of coast line under Russian administration that have been without a conclusive peace treaty between Japan and Russia. Norway and Russia negotiate on the delimitation of maritime boundaries. China and Japan dispute concerning the Senkaku Islands. India and Pakistan still dispute over Kashmir. Afghanistan - Pakistan on their boarder. The Spanish and Moroccan claims over Ceuta and Melilla. Bolivia – Chile – Peru dispute in the Atacama Desert. Mexico and USA dispute in their boarder lands. Canada disputes with USA and Denmark over maritime boundaries. Cambodia – Laos, Cambodia – Vietnam claim in Ratanakiri Province in Cambodia. Iraq and Turkey dispute in the Northern of Kurdistan region. Bahrain and Qatar dispute over maritime delimitation. Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan dispute in the Caspian. Spanish with Britain dispute in Gibraltar for territorial waters. Ireland and Britain dispute over their border. Bulgaria and Greece dispute over their boarder lands. It is possible that some of these disputes may have been currently resolved.
Read more
Few countries exercised arm conflicts, but soon sought legal resolution. Countries solve their territorial claims bilaterally, or at the international hearings, or through other means of mediations. For example: Germany and Denmark successfully resolved an age-old boarder dispute (1815 – 2001) of 68 kilometres. Russia and the United States of America agreed on fishing claims in the central Bering Sea, and Botswana was rewarded the disputed islands with Namibia.
For clarity, here are some of the on-going disputes which may impress us with their experiences: Russia and Japan have had their modern border dispute since 1945 over the Kurile Islands. They are four small islands along 1200 km. of coast line under Russian administration that have been without a conclusive peace treaty between Japan and Russia. Norway and Russia negotiate on the delimitation of maritime boundaries. China and Japan dispute concerning the Senkaku Islands. India and Pakistan still dispute over Kashmir. Afghanistan - Pakistan on their boarder. The Spanish and Moroccan claims over Ceuta and Melilla. Bolivia – Chile – Peru dispute in the Atacama Desert. Mexico and USA dispute in their boarder lands. Canada disputes with USA and Denmark over maritime boundaries. Cambodia – Laos, Cambodia – Vietnam claim in Ratanakiri Province in Cambodia. Iraq and Turkey dispute in the Northern of Kurdistan region. Bahrain and Qatar dispute over maritime delimitation. Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan dispute in the Caspian. Spanish with Britain dispute in Gibraltar for territorial waters. Ireland and Britain dispute over their border. Bulgaria and Greece dispute over their boarder lands. It is possible that some of these disputes may have been currently resolved.
Read more
Friday, 26 March 2010
Challenges to Peace and Stability in the Horn of Africa
The Most Conflicted Corner of the World
In the post-World War II era, the Horn of Africa has consistently been the most conflicted corner of the world. That is a bold assertion, but hear me out and then tell me if there is another region of the world that has consistently been more conflicted.
Ethiopia, Somalia and Eritrea recovered from wartime Italian military occupation only to confront soon thereafter a series of internal and inter-state conflicts. In the case of Ethiopia, this included a rebellion in Eritrea province, the violent overthrow of the Haile Selassie government by a military junta followed by an expanded internal war that in 1991 removed the military government that had deposed Haile Selassie. This event coincided with the hard fought independence of Eritrea from Ethiopia.
A bloody border war then broke out between Eritrea and Ethiopia in 1998. Although it ended two years later, it did not resolve the border disagreement and the leadership in the two countries remain implacably at odds. The government of Ethiopia faces opposition from elements of several armed ethnic groups clamoring for more political power or even independence. There is also a growing Eritrean exile community opposed to the government in Asmara.
Read more
In the post-World War II era, the Horn of Africa has consistently been the most conflicted corner of the world. That is a bold assertion, but hear me out and then tell me if there is another region of the world that has consistently been more conflicted.
Ethiopia, Somalia and Eritrea recovered from wartime Italian military occupation only to confront soon thereafter a series of internal and inter-state conflicts. In the case of Ethiopia, this included a rebellion in Eritrea province, the violent overthrow of the Haile Selassie government by a military junta followed by an expanded internal war that in 1991 removed the military government that had deposed Haile Selassie. This event coincided with the hard fought independence of Eritrea from Ethiopia.
A bloody border war then broke out between Eritrea and Ethiopia in 1998. Although it ended two years later, it did not resolve the border disagreement and the leadership in the two countries remain implacably at odds. The government of Ethiopia faces opposition from elements of several armed ethnic groups clamoring for more political power or even independence. There is also a growing Eritrean exile community opposed to the government in Asmara.
Read more
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)