Sudanese Civil War

At the end of a twenty year long civil war, Sudan and South Sudan have come to a treaty over the control and exportation of the two countries vast oil reserves. As a result of one of the most deadly civil wars in history and the creation of South Sudan, a majority Christian/ African state, governmental disputes between the two countries over control of the regions oil fields have resulted. The majority of the areas oil fields are located in the south; South Sudan's possession of natural resources is largely to blame for the conflict in the first place. The Arab-controlled government in the north largely sought to consolidate power in these areas through oppressive means dating back to independence resulting in state sponsored genocide and decades of ethnocentric war. The recent creation of South Sudan that marked the end of the war has not settled the conflict definitively. While South Sudan controls roughly seventy percent of the regions oil, all of the major pipelines with which to access them run north through Sudan to the Red Sea, creating serious conflicts over oil transportation in addition to the still contested Abyei area.

I picked this topic because it represents multiple ideas in African politics; the resource curse, ethnic conflict, and it highlights the results of arbitrarily drawn colonial borders. If for no other reason, attention should be paid to this issue because it has resulted in the deaths of two million people, but it also serves as a case study for ethnic conflict.

The political events that have occurred in Sudan since colonial independence largely reflect that of Primordialism. There has been a history of conflict between the two areas with Arabs in the north attempting to gain control of the water- rich and fertile south. The extreme poverty of the area has exacerbated this ethnic issue as Primordialism predicts. While the conflict between ethnicities has surely been utilized by political leaders, particularly Sudan's President Omar AL-Bashir, the conflict in Sudan is still “bottom-up” because the conflict is long-standing.

Given the history of the conflict I would ordinarily expect fighting to continue, however given the interdependency of the two countries I actually expect an era of improved relations. The creation of South Sudan as a state gives the South Sudanese much more legitimacy as an autonomous group making it harder for AL- Bashir's government to implement control where they once had. Additionally, both country's GDPs are over ninety-five percent oil-based so the prospect of war between the two autonomous states is now less appealing. The proposed pipeline that the South hopes to build through Kenya does provide more of an incentive for Sudan to infringe on southern territory, but after the ICC issued an arrest warrant for AL-Bashir his political capital is wearing thin on the international level. With the south of Sudan now an autonomous state it seems unlikely that war will continue, at least conventionally, between the two states. In order to help ensure stability in the area, the international community should place an emphasis on the autonomy of South Sudan by placing clear consequences if it is breached by their Arab neighbors to the north. Specifically, any oil embargo on Sudan would crush its completely oil-dependent economy.

Article:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19748523

Seymour, Lee J. M. (2003), "Review of Douglas Johnson, The Root Causes of Sudan’s Civil Wars", African Studies Quarterly 7 (1