CAIRO - Living with conflict since 1955, Sudan seems to be moving towards a pretty unknown future, as the Southern Sudanese head next Sunday to the polls to vote in the all-important referendum on whether South Sudan will get independence or not. While a lot of voices are calling for unity, stressing doubts about having two separate states, others predict that independence is inevitable. The dream of one united Sudan seems to have come to an end, with both sides apparently doing nothing to maintain it. On January 9, the Southern Sudanese are due to vote in a referendum on secession that is expected to split Africa's biggest country and give birth to the world's newest nation. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called a vote in favour of separation "inevitable”. The referendum is the culmination of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), brokered by the United States and others, which ended the 22 years of North-South fighting. By the time it was over, 2 million had died in the war, mostly from starvation and disease, rather than direct violence. Perhaps 4 million more were forced to flee their homes, leaving the region in tatters. According to Sudanese People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) Secretary-General Pagan Amum, Sudan could be partitioned because, since its independence, it has been beset by internal wars, mainly between the North and the South. For him, these wars have proved that the unity of the country is unsustainable, making it a failed state. Meanwhile, Ezekiel Gatkuoth, who heads the mission of the Government of South Sudan to the United States, says that the CPA agreement signed in 2005 was meant to address two issues. One is the democratic transformation of the country, making Sudan a better place for all Sudanese; the second objective is self-determination for the people of South Sudan, so they can determine their future. "We have failed to achieve option number one, because the (ruling) National Congress Party is committed to continuing with Islamisation and the Sharia [Islamic Law]... to make the whole of Sudan an Islamic republic. That is why the majority of Southern Sudanese are going for option number two, which is self-determination for the people of South Sudan. We have achieved objective number two," stresses Gatkuoth. In mid-November, Southerners began registering to vote, marking the final step before the referendum, but there are widespread fears that the vote may trigger a return to catastrophic violence. While everyone is sure about the emergence of the new country, very few can tell you what might happen after the January 9 vote that is likely to result in declaring a new, separate country in the South of Sudan. While all the efforts have failed to postpone the referendum, commentators and experts find signs of dangers surrounding the process, with most commentators worried because, although the referendum is just around the corner, the border issue has yet to be resolved. For example, the International Crisis Group (ICG) has proposed that the two sides must agree on a broad framework for cross-border arrangements, which could address cross-border movements, citizenship, seasonal movement, economic activities and post-referendum security, in order to avoid possible confrontations. Aquestion of oil One of the serious areas of debate between the North and South has been how to share the proceeds of the nation's oil wealth. Although located almost entirely in the South, until the CPA stipulated an interim sharing of revenues, oil earnings went to Khartoum. For some optimistic analysts, oil may be one of the factors of agreement between the two sides as most of it lies in the South, but they can only export it through the lines that go through the North. Another hot issue is another referendum in Abyei state, where much of the petroleum extraction takes place. It seems increasingly unlikely that this referendum will actually happen. Although the southern Government may agree to a compromise to allow the vote to proceed in other areas, popular sentiment against this idea appears strong. Other contentious issues include the future of two other states, which are traditionally part of the South but are not included in the January 9 referendum, as well as the definition of citizenship and the rights of the northern nomads who cross into the South in their annual grazing circuit. According to media reports, the militarisation of the borderlines by both sides is heightening the tension between the two major players in the Sudan peace process. The Khartoum Government is intensifying its military presence in the Abyei area. The prospect of violence and instability has prompted thousands of southern Sudanese, who live in the North, to leave for their land in the South, as they wait for the results, while most of the southern Sudanese living abroad aren't thinking about going home, at least for the time being. Fears of a domino effect The separation of the South may be just a beginning in series of more separation movements in Sudan or in other countries in the African continent, say experts. "What is happening in Sudan could become a contagious disease that affects the whole of Africa,” Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi recently warned. On another occasion, he predicted the opening of a crack in Africa's map. Algeria's Foreign Minister says that this partitioning will have fatal repercussions on the African continent, while Chadian President Idriss Deby cautions: "We all have a north and south. If we accept the break-up of Sudan, the domino effect will be inevitable and it will be a disaster for the continent." An economic study, conducted recently by the Institute for Security Studies along with several other NGOs, has tried to measure the economic cost of the eruption of violence again. The study challenges the Sudanese parties and those governments which have influence over the situation to ask themselves: ‘Are we doing enough to prevent a conflict that could cost $100 billion and hundreds of thousands of lives?' The report adds that the loss to the region will also be great, warning that the overall cost of conflict in Sudan to neighbouring countries could be about 34 per cent of their total GDP over the next decade (if the violence erupts again). For example, Kenya and Ethiopia could each potentially lose over $1 billion a year.
What about Egypt? Although most scenarios of conflict would not directly affect Egypt, the risk to Egypt is still serious. Apart from the economic impact, Egypt has a very strategic interest in Sudan because of the Nile. “Egypt is the only country that will pay the price of what happens in Sudan; if separation happens, the damage to Egypt will be more serious than to North Sudan," the former adviser to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Moustafa el-Fiqqi, said recently, adding that it was fortunate that Cairo's relations with South Sudan “are not bad”. “God inspired us with wisdom and we did not take part in the [North's] war against the South, in spite of the North trying to provoke us into doing so,” el-Fiqqi said. He warned of thepotential threats to Egyptian national security caused by Sudan's break-up, as “Israel will have a presence on our southern border.” "Leaders from the North came here to discuss the situation with us… we told them that, after the split, we won't be reconciled with them when they've brought Israel to our southern border. "The previous head of Israeli Military Intelligence admitted that Israel supervised the training of the South's military," El-Fiqi continued, adding that Israel has "units" there. He pointed out that South Sudan leader Salva Kiir has announced that he will open an Israeli embassy in the new state. However, Kiir denied the reports about the embassy in an interview with the London-based Al-Sharq Al-Awsat newspaper. Hany Raslan, an Egyptian expert on Sudan, believes that the creation of a new state in South Sudan will change the strategic situation in the region and will directly affect Egyptian national security. Raslan also warns that the eruption of violence in Sudan may lead to thousands of refugees flooding to the Egyptian border, which could cause many economic and social problems for Egypt. Egypt is currently involved in many development projects in the South, especially irrigation and water projects,costing millions of dollars. Among other things that the government of South Sudan should worry about is the legality of declaring independence under international law. According to experts, if South Sudan declares unilateral independence, it will need to rally for recognition; this may include rallying for the support of regional bodies like the African Union (AU), the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and international bodies such as the United Nations (UN). The AU and IGAD would most likely back the independence of South Sudan. However, if the issue reaches the UN Security Council, it is going to be difficult to predict how the members will respond to the unilateral declaration. Another thing that makes the international community worry is doubts about the ability of the new country to survive in a very bad economic, social and political atmosphere. NGOs have summarised the conditions under which most Southern Sudanese scrape a living: one in seven women dies during pregnancy, while the same proportion of newborns diebefore their fifth birthday. Of the 9 million people living in the South, 85 per cent are illiterate and 90 per cent live on less than $1 a day. According to the CPA, the southern and northern governments share the oil revenues, but very little improvement can be noticed in the South (according to news reports from there), which makes many southerners wonders where all the oil billions have gone. Unsurprisingly, talk about corruption abounds.
The Dinka threat
But some Southerners are just thinking with excitement about their new country, wondering about its name, its national language and its officials coat of arms. They also wonder who their first president will be, as they also still ask who killed late leader Dr John Garang. "People should separate first, then we will confront what is inside," Samuel Aban Deng, a senior courtier to the tribal king of the Shilluk tribe, an ethnic group that dominates Malakal in South Sudan, told a local Sudanese newspaper. But he is afraid that his tribe might be marginalised elsewhere in the South. Dressed in a traditional lawo sheet tied over his shoulder, Deng complains that the Dinka tribe controls the SPLM and has hijacked independence. He warns the other Southern tribes will not put up with it much longer. "The bigger threat to an independent South Sudan is not from outside, but from within," he stresses.
