Here in the making will be another disarmament history lesson to learn from!

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article27386
Forcible disarmament in South Sudan will not improve security

June 1, 2008 — In response to decades of armed violence and cattle rustling, the Government of South Sudan (GoSS) is planning a campaign to forcibly collect firearms from southern citizens. Government officials’ motivations are understandable. Endemic pastoralist violence is reaching dangerous levels and there are widespread suspicions of outside support for the perpetrators as part of efforts to scupper the fragile north-south peace process. But coercive disarmament will not resolve matters. It will likely exacerbate simmering tensions and could result in thousands of deaths. What is more, it will make the international community’s efforts to assist the fledgling government much more difficult.

Armed violence in Jonglei state is generating a political crisis of significant proportions. The state (about the size of Austria and Switzerland combined) is home to several ethnic groups—including the Dinka, Murle, Nuer, and Shilluk—with long-standing animosities toward one another. Of particular concern at the moment are Murle pastoralists who are raiding neighboring ethnic groups’ cattle that involve killings and abductions. Armed attacks—not just by the Murle— take place routinely throughout the state, resulting in many civilian deaths and the loss of livelihoods. The Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) has been deployed to the area but lacks mobility, training and the necessary communications infrastructure to deal with what amounts to pastoral warfare.

Cattle raiding is a time-honored tradition throughout the entire region. But whereas many years ago raiders used bows, arrows, and spears, they now use automatic rifles. Retributions involve similar weapons. This has resulted in a growing number of casualties and a breakdown of traditional conflict resolution procedures as elders’ authority has eroded.

The scale of the violence in Jonglei is spiraling out of control. During December 2007 in Bor, the capital of Jonglei, Murle raiders reportedly laid in wait for Dinka herders who set out to reclaim their stolen cattle. Some 30 Dinka were killed and another 30 injured in the ambush. Dinka from Bor retaliated by dragging five hospitalized ethnic Murle (not associated with the attackers) from their beds and killing them, as well as shooting to death a Murle government official and his daughter. The governor was subsequently re-assigned.

The new governor of Jonglei is keen to clamp down on the violence by taking away the guns. In so doing, he hopes to create a secure environment that allows development to proceed and communities to experience the dividends of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). While his intentions are good, however, his plan is flawed.

The current plan is reportedly for the removal of weapons from citizens in Jonglei, in a six-month campaign that is to begin in June. Although a ‘voluntary’ disarmament campaign has been ongoing among the Murle in Pibor county, Jonglei state, the governor has stated that forcible disarmament—though likely to be bloody—is a necessary short-term measure to provide long-term stability. With security, he argues, come development (e.g. health, education, basic services) and prosperity.

Past experience in southern Sudan may well prove him wrong.

A SPLA disarmament campaign in central Jonglei in the first half of 2006 was brutal in its execution. More than 1,000 people lost their lives in the course of the initiative that targeted the Lou Nuer and netted some 4,000 weapons. Besides the traumatic loss of life, the campaign against local militias (e.g. the ‘white army’) and civilians also resulted in considerable human rights violations, significant internal displacement, and wide-scale looting and food insecurity. The governor believes, however, that subsequent peaceful campaigns in other parts of Jonglei—which the United Nations supported—went smoothly because of the SPLA’s willingness to use deadly force in the initial exercise.

Importantly, the 2006 campaign was intended to be peaceful—just as the latest initiative is meant to be. But the lessons of the past must be taken seriously. Despite efforts to sensitize local communities about the benefits of disarmament and attempts to negotiate buy-in from local chiefs throughout Jonglei, violence nevertheless exploded. Moreover, the ‘successes’ recorded, including by the UN, were largely ephemeral. Recent reports suggest that the relatively modest number of weapons that were ultimately recovered was rapidly offset by subsequent rearmament.

One of the main problems associated with piecemeal or uneven disarmament is that neighboring communities remain armed. The GoSS has primary responsibility for providing security for those who are disarmed, but has routinely failed to do so. The United Nations peacekeeping mission has neither the mandate nor the resources to assume this role. Meanwhile, raids by warring communities show no sign of letting-up. In the absence of security, civilians are compelled to rearm in order to protect themselves. This is especially true of Jonglei where the Lou Nuer are reportedly more heavily armed now than before the 2006 campaign.

Another limitation of the governor’s plan is that many of the Murle cattle raiders have not returned home from far-away, dry-season grazing grounds. Armed Murle youth are reportedly well aware of the governor’s plans and have decided to remain outside of Jonglei for the time being. The SPLA is, therefore, not likely to find the real aggressors. Instead it will find members of an ethnic group determined to resist being disarmed. Even if security is provided by the SPLA, the Murle will likely feel they are being targeted for political reasons and resist. Arms and bullets are not in short supply in this part of the world. Any altercation is likely to be bloody.

What to do?

First, the governor should work to keep the SPLA deployed in Pibor county during the upcoming rainy season and beyond. Together with the GoSS, he should ensure that they are provided with sufficient supplies so that they can avoid looting and build better relations with the community. In demonstrating their capacity to provide security they are more likely to earn the respect of the local population through good behaviour and good works. The Small Arms Survey’s research reveals that many people in Pibor feel their physical security is the same or has actually diminished since the CPA was signed in January 2005. Here is a chance for the GoSS to provide genuine security to communities and an excellent opportunity to win hearts and minds.

Second, Sultan Ismael Konye, peace and reconciliation advisor to President Salva Kiir, has been leading the voluntary disarmament exercise among his people, the Murle. Having rejoined the SPLM/A in 2006 following years of support from Khartoum and attacks by his Pibor Defence Force against the southern rebels, he deserves more time to prove his commitment to the CPA and to peace.

And third, allow the UN and the international community to aid the government to reduce armed violence, enhance security, and hasten development. The UN’s two recent small-scale disarmament initiatives in Jonglei resulted in the recovery of more than 3,000 weapons. The cost? Less than USD 20,000. Whereas those efforts were ad hoc, the UN’s new Community Security and Arms Control (CSAC) programme has pledged almost USD 3 million to improve law and order, support good governance, and assist in reforming the security sector as part of a broad effort to recover weapons and reduce demand for them. While more political and financial investment is needed, it represents a good start.

Forcible disarmament has been shown not to work in South Sudan. While it may highlight the government’s commitment to action, it tends to be short-sighted and can result in brutal violence. Making matters worse, the current plan laid out by Jonglei’s governor will not target those primarily responsible for armed violence in the state. Instead, it will result in armed resistance and threaten the lives of innocent civilians caught in the cross-fire. It will almost certainly lead to further attacks and rearmament and should be avoided until other options are exhausted. President Salva Kiir should actively promote alternatives to military action and build on the potentially positive initiatives underway.

Eric G. Berman, Managing Director, Small Arms Survey, an independent research institute based in Geneva. The Survey undertakes numerous projects on armed violence and small arms, including the Sudan Human Security Baseline Assessment (HSBA) project. See www.smallarmssurvey.org/sudan
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article27420
South Sudan’s disarmament policy – a necessary evil

June 4, 2008 – To distinguish civilians from rebels and protecting our historical peace deal – the Compressive Peace Agreement (CPA), it is an ideal step to start disarmament now then later.

Congratulations to Jonglei governor Gen. Kuol Manyang Juuk that the second phase of liberating the marginalized people of the Sudan is to begin again in Bor Town. This is totally self-marginalization. Our trusted government of Jonglei state will do the best to apprehend those who choose military confrontation – it is a necessary evil.

The Sudan’s People Liberation Army (SPLA) is a nature disciplined army and does not completely loot its own people. It is an absolutely baseless argument that SPLA uses maximum force to suppress civilians. SPLA, like angels, respect loyal citizens and like chameleon, changes with situation. The army is a peace loving one. I hope the army will use the necessary force to take guns and committing necessary evils to serve million lives - far better than allowing silent genocide in South Sudan. Losing thirty lives in Duk-Nuer clashes in Jonglei in one attack is a big tragedy. How many people will be lost by the end of the year as we campaign for disarmament without action?

With an experience on the field, Jonglei is very volatile to herself than pre-CPA. The period between 1983 and 2005 had been devotedly used by our brethrens to protect themselves knowing that every one was an enemy. But after 2005, the population – now tired of wars and reports of deaths, resorted to realizing peace by rerouting to business, rearing minimum number of cattle and marrying wives in names of the deceased as Dinka culture argued in Bor. In Murle, things started in the same dynamics just before 2005. But after CPA, something happened. In Nuer of Jonglei as well, movement of people fro and to Dinka Bor and vice versa was going on smoothly till 2006. And something also happened. These tribes do not have ‘special problem’ that attract the world interest rather their cattle greediness.

Given all these ups-and-downs change of behaviors, Government of South Sudan (GoSS) should do something too. Because something is happening!

To truck down the main points in few lines, one need to clearly answer the following questions before challenging the GoSS directives to head of ten Southern Sudan states to disarm their people;
Where do the local communities get ammunitions to feed their ugly guns?
Why are the members of legislative Assemblies in the GoSS and state government reluctant to convince their constituencies to give-up arms?
Why is raiding intertribal? Why not a gang against the none? – Something is happening!
Who will compensate the lost lives?
Why do writers take side in commending articles? Something is happening!

Given the above questions and more you know as a full evolved human being, then disarmament has no substitute.

Some perpetrators opposed to the idyllic decision taken by GoSS and effectively being implemented by the respected military oriented state of Jonglei have gone as far as calling the process “Forcible.” Why can’t one understand when Governor Kuol Manyang Juuk says “all units of government including the civil society will be involved to…..to answer the question of conspiracy.”

Governor Kuol is very clear that disarmament will respect those who respect their lives. After all, everyone wants to go to heaven but no one wants to die. Why not giving bonus to those intellectuals who want peace but fear their masses’ addiction to the use of guns – mainly for theft and other ill operations. I tell you; those encouraging intertribal conflicts will not see the Promised Land – the New Sudan. But never worry, just repent like many Southern Sudanese had done after committing suicidal moves to either abroad, Khartoum or back to villages and spread hatred amongst the marginalized people of Sudan in general.

Either way, it worked to lose two million lives in the two decades civil war of mainly “natural” Sudanese and the “Sudanese by choice.” Believe me or not many of people in Khartoum fall under the “choice” category – the Arabs. The black Sudanese nationals face a lot of challenges before, now and will be. The question of who arm communities thus has a liable answer – the Khartoum government. So, to oppose disarmament is to be answerable to the atrocities going on in Darfur and Abyei. The International Criminals Court in The Hague is about to issue charges against those involved in Darfur. The next time ICC meets on Sudan will be to decide on who is violating CPA. Who is ready to answer this question behind bars in The Hague?

In Jonglei, many communities do not really want arms but the higher officials’ reluctance to act caused suspicions of supporting intertribal clashes.

As such, disarmament, peaceful as designed by Jonglei government or to turn forcible in a due course to achieve the mission, is a necessary evil.

The writer is a Student at Dr. John Garang de Mabior Institute of Science and Technology and a member of Institute Press, GARANG DAILY – Bor Town, Jonglei state. Contact; garangdaily@hotmail.com