While secession is the likely outcome of Sudan's imminent referendum on southern independence, not everyone, north or south, supports partition, writes Ismail Kushkush On 9 January 2011, the southern Sudanese head to the polls to decide whether to remain in a united Sudan or to go independent. The referendum comes at the end of the six-year interim period agreed upon between the National Congress Party (NCP) and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) who signed the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in the Kenyan resort Nivasha in January 2005. The reaction to the referendum and its likely outcome, the birth of an independent South Sudan state, has been mixed. Southern Sudanese are likely to vote in favour of "separation". This was not always the case. On the eve of Sudanese independence in 1956 despite some calls for a separate south Sudan state, most southern Sudanese would have preferred to live in a united Sudan. But decades of war, bad governance, uneven economic development, social discrimination along with some foreign encouragement have cemented mistrust towards northerners and have fed into calls for a separate state. But not all south Sudanese would like to see a separate homeland. Among south Sudanese, there still exist those who consciously believe in the late south Sudanese leader John Garang's vision of a "New Sudan". A Sudan, in their mind, that would be "reconstructed" on the values of secularism, democracy and equal citizenship regardless of tribe, ethnicity or creed. Other south Sudanese who view "separation" with some scepticism are south Sudan's Muslims. While a politically divided community in itself with varying attitudes, many south Sudanese Muslims have long had concerns of being viewed as "Arab wannabes" by their fellow south Sudanese, thus preferring a united Sudan that can overcome its challenges. And along the long north/south border, there is the question of "mixed-communities". In places like Renk and Abyei, and other towns, centuries of inter-marrying have produced populations that claim ancestry to both sides of the "border", many who also would rather live in a united Sudan than face the question "who's side are you on?" But most importantly, the hundreds of thousands of south Sudanese that live in the north who either came as internally displaced peoples (IDPs) because of the civil war, or sought economic opportunities, or students who came to study in the north. The reality is that after decades of being in the north, relocating to the south may not be an easy or feasible task, after cementing life's realities, home, school and work in the north. But given the now overwhelming and open call for separation by key south Sudanese politicians, the pressures of kin and tribe, and even cases of intimidation, it is unlikely that any of the above groups would vote for anything but separation, or ignore the referendum process and hope for the best. In the north, like the south, attitudes vary. Northern Sudanese are not participants in the voting process, and yet some believe they should also have a say in the "nation's destiny". For most northern Sudanese, the reality that south Sudan will likely separate has begun to sink in. The prevailing attitude is a preference for unity, but to let southern Sudanese freely choose their destiny, and if separation happens, to respect that choice and "remain brothers". For many northerners giving up on the historic idea of Sudan as the "land of one million square miles" that stretches from Nimoli in the south to Wadi Halfa in the north, from Kassala in the east to Jeneinna in the west, is too much to bear. Many northerners are beginning to now take a deep look inside. Who is to blame for this? Some place the blame on the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) and its Islamisation policies of the 1990s, while others view this as an ultimate result of the failure of consecutive governments since Sudanese independence in 1956 to come up with a formula of governance that would suit Sudan's large geography and diverse population. Others place most of the blame on colonialism and neo-colonialism who sought to prevent the creation of a modern powerful Sudanese state with all of its riches. But in the north not all are unhappy to see the south separate. In past years, as a result of wars in Sudan's peripheries, the south and Darfur, and growing sense of "northern nationalism" has begun to brew. For them, the war in the south was the reason for Sudan's inability to progress and develop as many believe it should have. This camp also argues that ethnic, social and cultural differences between the north and south are deep enough to promote "separation" and that south Sudan should have been a separate political entity to begin with. Whatever the outcome is, concern for a peaceful process is what all hope for. A descent into a new civil war would be many times more disastrous then previous wars, in a large country where tribal, ethnic and communal conscience is growing, weapons are more accessible, and international players have a greater say. All realise this is a historic event, and Africa and the world are watching.
