South Sudan: Yet Another Crisis

New measures announced by the United States targeting South Sudanese 15 oil-related entities raises three major questions: whether such measures will help further peace through curtailing funds that are fueling the fighting, also the impact of these ......

New measures announced by the United States targeting South Sudanese 15 oil-related entities raises three major questions: whether such measures will help further peace through curtailing funds that are fueling the fighting, also the impact of these measures on Sudan and the bigger picture of the role of the state, whose control will provide access to wealth and power.

It has been more than four years since the deadly struggle broke out between President Salva Kiir and once his deputy Riek Machar. Peace deals and ceasefire agreements are signed simply to be sidelined and ignored because there is no genuine desire for peace. The United States and some of its lobby figures and groups, who have been instrumental in pushing for South Sudan separation feel they are morally responsible, if not out-rightly guilty, of what is going on and have started early on to be critical of political performance in South Sudan. Now it seems they moved into action.

The advocacy group Sentry, co-founded by actor George Clooney and activist John Prendergast, continued to issue investigative reports about South Sudan: on the level of corruption among its leaders and grab of the country's resources for the benefit of its elites. Earlier this month Sentry published a report that detailed transactions amounting to more than $80 million from Sudapet, the national oil company to fund militias and officials.

The new American measures require that any exports, imports or transactions with these companies need a licence from the commerce department. The move is seen by Juba as an attempt to impose a regime change in the country. It came on the heels of an arms embargo imposed by Washington too. No wonder, oil revenue provides the country's coffers with more than 90 percent of its income and constitute some 60 percent of its GDP according to the World Bank calculations.

Oil production and revenue have been dwindling since the separation from the peak of 300, 000 barrels per day (bpd) averaging currently some 140,000 bpd though the government was boosting and promising it is going to more than double that figures this year.

On the other hand, these developments opens a new challenge for Sudan. It is the transit fees that provides Khartoum with some hard currency and sometimes it takes its dues in kind to feed its refinery with crude. Reducing or eliminating this source will add complications to an already complicated situation.

How long South Sudan can stand such measures and how a political solution could be found for its complex crisis remains to be seen. To complicate things more, Ethiopia, which was the usual venue for such talks is going through delicate political transition that is yet to settle. Juba, which was not keen on resuming peace talks tried to make use of the situation suggesting changing the venue, which was declined by the opposition.

Washington statement on imposing these measures called on the regional and international community to join it in limiting fiscal flows to South Sudan.

And that where Sudan comes in and being on the top of the list of those concerned. In addition to more than 2,000 km of joint borders it shares, Sudan downstream utilities from central processing facilities, to pipelines to ports are the only window for South Sudan oil industry to function.

But on the other hand Sudan has its ongoing dialogue with Washington to remove its name from the list of states supporting terrorism and will not be in a position to rock the boat. One of the possibilities is to engage with Washington in some talks on this issue, but within the bigger picture of Sudan-US bilateral relations.

The American measures that were intended to hit where it hurts, on pockets, refocuses the attention on an issue long debated by political scientists. What is happening in South Sudan seems to be a classic case of how state apparatus is used to gain power and access wealth.

Studies by notable researcher like Clemence Pinaud in his article South Sudan: Civil War, Predation and the making of a Military Aristocracy discussed this issue in detail. In his study he addressed the social and political implications of wartime and post-war resources captured in South Sudan. He argued that predation by armed groups initiated a process of dominant class formation and eventually domination.

It is this control now is being targeted with implications that is yet to unravel, for both Sudan and South Sudan.