INTERESTS OF MAJ POWERS IN SUDAN (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Sudanese Conflicts: A Multi-Level Game With Regional and International Interest
EJMSS JOURNAL VOLUME 3 NO 2, 2023
The Sudanese conflicts are complex and involve various actors with different interests, assuming regional and international dimensions, with neighbouring countries and international actors having a stake in the outcome of the conflict. These conflicts in Sudan which started from 1955 to 2011 when South Sudan seceded have resulted in a significant humanitarian crisis, with millions of people displaced and in need of humanitarian assistance. In addition to the conflict in Darfur, the conflicts in the Blue Nile and South Kordofan states have also led to displacement and humanitarian needs. The paper explores the regional and international interests in the conflicts, and how these interests have shaped the conflicts. The methodology employed for this study is contextual analysis. The theoretical framework adopted is the Conflict Transformation Theory, which emphasizes addressing the root causes of conflicts and transforming the relationships between conflicting parties to achieve sustainable peace. The findings of the study revealed that the Sudanese conflicts have become a point of interest to several actors. The study concludes by emphasizing that it is imperative that all regional and international actors work together towards finding a lasting solution to the conflicts in Sudan. It recommends that the United Nations and African Union should continue to support peacekeeping efforts in Sudan.
Politics of the Sudanese Civil War: An Assessment of Intervention and Resolution
EJMSS JOURNAL VOLUME 3 NO 2, 2023
The Sudanese crisis has run into decades of political instability, ethnic tensions, and economic challenges, resulting in the emergence of armed conflicts and widespread violence. This paper examinedthe politics of civil war, intervention, and resolution in the context of the Sudanese crisis which led to the creation of South Sudan. The methodology adopted is content analysis. The paper adopted the theory of cooperative conflict resolution. The findings of this study reveal that while external interventions can contribute to a peaceful resolution, they can also exacerbate the conflict by fueling factionalism and perpetuating violence. The paper also highlighted the role of local actors in shaping the trajectory of the conflict and the importance of their inclusion in the resolution process. The paper concludes with the notion that a lasting resolution to the Sudanese crisis will require sustained efforts by all stakeholders, including the Sudanese government, rebel groups, regional actors, and the international community. It recommends that to effectively resolve the Sudanese crisis, the root cause of the conflict should be addressed. This may involve addressing historical injustices, addressing ethnic and religious tensions, improving economic opportunities, and promoting social inclusion.
Sudan’s North-South Conflict and Civil War
Journal of Developing Country Studies
Purpose: Sudan has been at war with itself following a conflict that has “consumed the country of 34 of its 45 years of independence and remains the only constant factor in a land whose population has repeatedly been devastated. The study sought to establish the Sudan North –South conflict and civil war. Methodology: The research was purely qualitative. Desktop literature review was conducted. Critical analysis of the literature was conducted. Findings: The study found out that the war in Sudan was caused by both economic and non-economic motives. It can be noted from this study that indeed, that war is caused by many factors. However, the most argued about cause of war is the economic agenda. For example, this study hypothetically argues that the economic agenda was a main cause of war in South Sudan. To begin with, the Government of Sudan was interested in the South due to the numerous oil deposits that are located there. That’s why, as observed by Prendergast, the Government of S...
Analysis of the patterns and processes of conflict resolution In Sudan: 1983-2011
HUMANUS DISCOURSE, 2022
Sudan experienced the longest civil war in the history of conflict in Africa up to 2011. The first civil war started after independence in 1956 and lasted till 1972, while the second ran from 1983 to 2011, when Southern Sudan seceded in 2011 via a referendum. The first conflict followed Khartoum’s failure to implement the agreement made with Southerners before independence from Britain in 1956. Southern soldiers mutinied and the war broke out. The soldiers then formed a militia group called ‘Anya Nya’, which was led by General Joseph Lagu (Rtd.). The primary demand of this group was equality in all spheres of national life. The second civil war ended after implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) which was signed in 2005. The second war took protracted patterns and processes before it could be ended in 2011. This paper however, examines and analyses the patterns and processes involved in the negotiations for peace on four tracks which are as follow: Track One: Involvement of the North and South Sudanese who organised conferences from the grassroots up to the level of the warlords on how the conflict could be resolved. This marked the foundation on which other processes were built. Track Two: Involvement of the sub-regional organization Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD), which organised and moderated the conferences held both within and outside Sudan from 1983 to 2011. Track Three: Involvement of the US, the EU, the Troika countries, and China. These countries spent millions of US dollars trying to end the war. Track Four: Involvement of international organisations such as the UNSC and the AU in collaboration with IGAD. The study adopts content analysis research methods. It utilises primary sources, which were accessed from different repositories in Nigeria, Sudan, and South Sudan, such as the Institute of African Studies, University of Ibadan. The work is organised thematically and chronologically. The study establishes that internal mechanisms contributed extensively to the resolution of the Sudanese conflicts in 2011. Without it hostilities would most certainly have continued. It also played an important role in the secession of South Sudan from Sudan without recourse to war.
Southern Sudan at odds with itself: Dynamics of conflict and predicaments of peace
With Sudan’s elections over, this is the moment to refocus on challenges that lie ahead for Southern Sudan in the coming few months. The tremendous task of conducting elections as part of what was agreed in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) has in the recent past placed an emphasis on technical aspects and it is likely that in the coming months attention will similarly be concentrated on technical elements of the upcoming referendum on Southern Sudan’s independence in 2011. To counter this, this report focuses on some of the broader and more conceptual issues in Southern Sudan today. Its main undertaking is to deliver information that clarifies the reasons for increased intra-south violence. By reflecting on how those living and working in Southern Sudan have experienced conflict and peace-building since the CPA, the reports looks at how complex intra-southern structures and international approaches in Southern Sudan have created some of the current predicaments of peace and dynamics of conflict. Questioning established narratives, the report finds that even un-emphasised issues --such as the lack of internal border demarcation-- have a direct impact on local violence in an environment where various elements of Southern Sudan are, it seems, at odds with itself. It also identifies a structural gap in the development/reconstruction/peace-building approach that has contributed to making local violence more likely as it aims to establish state institutions, particularly at the local level, that in turn have contributed to local conflict. The complex interconnectedness of these issues underlines the importance of moving away from simplistic categorisations in order to arrive at a more multi-faceted analysis.
THE SUDAN CRISIS: BREEDING A NEW FRONT FOR A PREVENTIVE PROXY WAR
Ola-lawal, M. A. , 2023
The ongoing civil unrest in Sudan has provoked this tenor of this study. The study discussed the concept of preventive proxy war and traced it's genesis up till the present practice among global and regional powers till date. The study was also able to link the identify how the Sudan crisis could be a floodgate to preventive proxy war, giving room for global and regional powers to invest in it.
Why do some peace agreements end armed conflicts whereas others do not? Previous studies have primarily focused on the relation between warring parties and the provisions included in peace agreements. Prominent mediators, however, have emphasised the importance of stakeholders at various levels for the outcome of peace agreements. To match the experience of these negotiators we apply a level-of-analysis approach to examine the contextual circumstances under which peace agreements are concluded. While prominent within the causes of war literature, level-of-analysis approaches are surprisingly scant in research about conflict resolution. This article compares two Sudanese Peace Agreements: the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (2005) that ended the North–South war and led to the independence of South Sudan, and the Darfur Peace Agreement (2006) which failed to end fighting in Darfur. We find that factors at the local, national and international level explain the different outcomes of the two agreements. Hence, the two case studies illustrate the merit of employing a level-of-analysis approach to study the outcome of peace agreements. The main contribution of this article is that it presents a new theoretical framework to understand why some peace agreements terminate armed conflict whereas others do not.