The Intern-governmental Agency for Development, known by its acronym as IGAD is, according to recent reports, on the verge of a diplomatic breakthrough to end the South Sudan conflict. The wind of peace and stability is certainly blowing over the Horn of Africa. In Sudan, a potentially explosive political confrontation between the masses and the military authorities have been diffused thanks to Ethiopian and African Union mediation efforts. Eritrea and Ethiopia have embarked on a long-awaited normalization process.
Further south, Kenya and Uganda are bracing to join the peace and development opportunities that are shaping up across the region. A year ago this time, the Horn of Africa was on the verge of collapse with mass protests in Ethiopia against regime brutality and human rights abuses. South Sudan was convulsing with ethnic conflicts between followers of incumbent president Salva Kirr and rival Reich Machar following mutual accusations of attempted-coup and counter-coup.
The people of South Soudan subsequently bore the brunt of elite conflict with the leadership of SPLM. At one point, Sudan and South Sudan were standing on the brink of war over the oil-rich region of Abiye following the independence of the latter. A year ago, Ethiopia and Eritrea were locking horns over the border conflict that took place 20 years earlier and led to a no war no peace deadlock.
Nowadays, most of the sticking points that led to these conflicts have progressively vanished and the diplomatic language has changed from belligerence to reconciliation. This is a breakthrough for the entire region although the process has claimed the lives tens of thousands of innocent people who have nothing to do with the conflicts.
The political elites who are mainly responsible for these crises faced further polarization and it required the intervention of the AU and IGAD in particular to persuade them that war is not the way of the future in this region which was decimated by decades of internecine conflicts. The role of the AU and Ethiopia in particular is more than remarkable. It was the factor that definitely shaped the peace and normalization process.
It is to be recalled that the disagreements, rivalries and mutual accusations with the leadership of the SPLM were the main causes of the South Sudanese political conundrum. The trouble with ethnically divided African countries is that elite conflicts inevitably cause the long-dormant inter-ethnic political seism to turn into active volcanoes whose magma is bound to wash away any hope of peace and stability among the masses.
Elite groups vying for power and domination almost always transfer their differences to their otherwise peaceful and passive constituencies that are easily mobilized for mutual carnage.
In Africa, the political irresponsibility and greed of the misguided elites soon consumes the innocent masses in the fires of war and bloody conflicts. This is what caused the 1994 Rwandan Genocide. This was what caused the Somali crisis that tore tribal allegiances asunder and led to the rise of one of the most heinous terrorist organization that is still sowing blood and tears in the region.
Turning back the Kirr-Machar political rivalry, we now realize that had the two veteran leaders of the SPLM were visionary and responsible, they could have foreseen the bloody consequences of their decisions and accepted the various calls for peace right at the start of the war.
They both turned deaf ears to the calls for peace and reconciliation umpteenth times made by IGAD, the AU and Ethiopia’s tireless politicians and diplomas. The two personalities spent much of the years of war trying to undermine one another while their followers were paying with blood for their wrong decisions and attitudes.
If there is any lesson that the people of the Horn can draw from this chapter of their recent history, it is the fact that their salvation lies not in the hands of political elites but in their own hands. Recent events in Sudan are the best example of mass empowerment and democratic aspirations.
The other inevitable lesson from the South Sudanese tragedy is that once an ethnic conflict is started, there is no way stopping it before it claims tens of thousands of innocent lives. The only possible guarantee is to prevent any conflict before it even starts by removing the causes behind it.
That is also why a rapid intervention force in this part of Africa under the command of the AU political leadership is needed so that it could interfere before or as soon as the first shots are fired. Who started the war is not an issue because the consequences are generally horrendous, irrespective of which party fires the first shots.
The political dynamics in the Horn are mutually dependent and closely intertwined so much so that war or peace in one country is bound to impact the neighbor next door. It is important to note in this connection that the South Sudan conflict recently took a turn to the better simply because the direction of the wind in the region in general indicated towards peace and stability.
The reform process in Ethiopia is undoubtedly one factor that has positively determined the direction of the wind. The recent return from the brink of disaster in Sudan is also a positive factor that sent home the message that no conflict would end in the Horn with clear winners and that all parties in the conflicts would only be losers in the end.
The Ethio-Eritrean peace process is another positive development that has positively changes the political mood and direction in the region by proving that war would only lead to a deadlock or another breakout sooner or later. Had there been clear winners in ethnic conflicts, the various tribal factions that have come and gone could have won the war there.
Unfortunately, what we are now witnessing in Somalia is further tribal fragmentation and violence by the most extremist and brutal factions of the elite groups whether these groups appear under tribal, religious or political masks.
The other lesson the Kirr-Machar confrontation and its devastating consequences teach is that no single country in the entire region is capable of end an internal conflict once it is started casually. It is in fact easier to start a war in this region but extremely difficult to bring it to an end. By the same token, it is rather easier to create chaos than to bring about stability. The Kirr-Machar differences started with simple arguments that could be addressed through dialogue. This in turn degenerated into a conflict along ethnic lines and led to untold miseries.
The post-independence leadership of the SPLM could not avert this disaster because the power struggles within the movement have not yet crystallized and created a reliable and authoritative leadership. The death of John Garang, the historic leader of the movement, had prevented the emergence of a strong and binding leadership that could transcend the ethnic or tribal divides and work for national unity and salvation.
It would therefore be erroneous to conclude that the two subsequent contesting leaders of the SPLM, Kirr and Machar were behind the present process of reconciliation and hope. If left to their own designs, the two rival leaders would probably fight to the hilt and turn South Sudan into another failed state in the Horn.
It rather required the long and arduous diplomatic efforts of critical regional players such as the AU, IGAD and Ethiopia to bring the ravages of conflicts at least to a temporary end. The two leaders had no choice but to agree with the diplomatic initiatives instead of proceeding on the path of political suicide.
The two factional leaders had needlessly exhausted themselves militarily and politically in a conflict they could easily started but could not win. This is a vital lessons for countries of the regions where rival elites might be tempted to try the hard way of war to advance their personal or group ambitions.
In the meantime, IGAD has, at the end of the day, proved that it has real diplomatic teeth that can bite. Ethiopia has played a pivotal role in the search for peace both on its own and as leader of IGAD. Without IGAD’s energetic and laborious diplomatic intervention, the South Sudan crisis could not have reached the current promising phase of hope for final settlement.
As we said above, there is also a vital lesson Kirr as well Machar can learn from the peaceful political settlement in Sudan where the military could only win the trust of the opposition and the masses, after it has done away with rivalries within its own ranks, culminating in Bashar’s ouster.
In the final analysis however, the credit for the current hope for a peaceful settlement in South Sudan should go to IGAD, the AU and more particularly to Ethiopia that has given everything for peace in South Sudan, including the hosting of hundreds of thousands of refugees to providing all logistic support to the peace process.
If things go well from now onwards, the next chapter will usher in an era of peace and stability in South Sudan and the wind of peace will continue to blow over Somalia possibly as its last destination.
The Ethiopian Herald Sunday Edition 1 September 2019
BY MULUGETA GUDETA
