Photo taken on June 27, 2018 shows the signing ceremony of South Sudan conflicting parties in Khartoum, South Sudan, June 27, 2018. (Xinhua/ Mohamed Khidir)
JUBA, July 4 (Xinhua) -- A permanent peace deal reached in Sudan last week between South Sudan warring parties under the mediation of President Omar al-Bashir shows that Khartoum has more leverage over Juba rival leaders, experts said on Wednesday.
James Okuk, professor of political science at University of Juba, told Xinhua on Tuesday that President Salva Kiir and rebel leader Riek Machar and the members of the South Sudan Opposition Alliance (SSOA) see the Sudan mediation positively because of the historical connection and interests of the two countries.
"The warring parties are happy with the mediation in Khartoum than the one in Addis Ababa. The other positive thing they think that Khartoum has leverage over South Sudan. Once Khartoum is involved they think that no one will spoil the (Khartoum) deal," Okuk told Xinhua in Juba.
He disclosed that both countries stand to benefit after having agreed to rehabilitate the damaged oil fields in a bid to resume oil production to levels prior to outbreak of the December 2013 conflict.
However, Okuk said that both countries are experiencing economic hardship due to low oil production and any deal that helps resuscitate production unites both political elites to unconditionally accept to end the conflict.
South Sudan won independence from Sudan in 2011 and went with 75 percent of oil resource leaving Khartoum to earn revenue on oil pipeline and transportation fees to Port Sudan.
Okuk added that the involvement of both President Yoweri Museveni and Bashir further vindicates the influence and importance Kampala and Khartoum respectively have over the warring leaders in South Sudan which provides hope of ending the conflict.
Juba-based political analyst Jacob Chol told Xinhua that the Khartoum declaration could help speed up peace negotiations compared to the usually slow paced negotiations in Addis Ababa.
He, however, disclosed that power sharing and security arrangement will remain stumbling blocks among the warring parties as they have failed to agree on period for formation of one national army and how they manage the transition period that expires in August according to the 2015 peace agreement.
"I think their failure will come from security, they have failed to agree on how their militaries can come together, how many soldiers to integrate. The second issue will be on how to manage the transitional period and power sharing," Chol said.
He also said the fresh violation of the "permanent" ceasefire within less than the agreed 72 hours on June 30 which left 16 people killed and 22 people wounded in the northern Upper Nile region shows cracks, sign of dissatisfaction or lack of consensus among the signatories to the Khartoum peace deal.
South Sudan Opposition Alliance (SSOA) in a statement castigated the Khartoum peace deal as narrowing the South Sudan problems to Salva Kiir-Riek Machar affair while excluding other opposition groups.
They later on signed the peace deal but first thought assurances from President Al-Bashir on the issue of inclusivity of other opposition groups.
The warring parties are supposed to conclude discussions on June 10 in Khartoum and then will head further to Nairobi for further talks at some undisclosed date under President Uhuru Kenyatta's mediation.
Remember Miamingi, a member of the South Sudan human rights observatory, welcomed the permanent ceasefire but expressed fears that this too will break down like both the 2015 permanent ceasefire and the 2017 Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (COHA) on December 21.
"A ceasefire monitored through bilateral arrangements and by countries who are either proxies to the conflict or parties to the conflict has an in build propensity to fail," he said.
Miamingi said the parties should not neglect discussion on federalism or decentralization of powers which are the real issues that led to the failure of the High Level Revitalization Forum (HLRF) in Addis Ababa.
"A failure to reach an agreement on sustainable peace, on an acceptable system of governance that devolves power to the people and on reconstruction of the security sector, will not only undo gains on permanent ceasefire but will not attract international funding to reboot the economy and pay," he added.
