The South Sudan National Dialogue: Hope Through Inclusive Processes

Sudanese citizens weigh in on the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in Musfa, Blue Nile State.  Photo courtesy of the United Nations via Flickr Commons 

On May 22, 2017, President Salva Kiir officially launched the National Dialogue in South Sudan. This National Dialogue process aims to address the complexities of South Sudan's conflict through discourse that links the national, regional, and grassroots levels in efforts to curb the civil war. The civil war broke out in South Sudan in December 2013, after merely three years of relative peace. Since then, the war has quickly metamorphosed into a complex conflict that includes intense fighting within and between communities in different regions of South Sudan. The conflict is motivated by several underlying political and social-economic factors including ethnic division, resource scarcity, marginalization of groups, and political rivalry mainly between the ruling South Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM) and SPLM-In Opposition. The National Dialogue is a part of an effort employed by the government to firstly confront the causes of the war, and at the same time bring about peace and positive development as the country struggles towards a cease-fire.

The National Dialogue process in South Sudan is envisaged to be an inclusive process that utilizes both bottom-up and top-down processes, and multi-leveled consultations. This will ideally involve a vertical communication from the political elite and local communities in managing this dialogue process. The importance of inclusivity in the dialogues in South Sudan  proves to be a great resource in working toward peace in South Sudan. Generally, national dialogues have been an effective tool used by different countries to promote peacebuilding, such as South Africa in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Rwanda in their Gacaca process.

Due to the effectiveness of the dialogues in countries such as South Africa, it is no wonder that many hope that the dialogue would create a platform for people's voices to be heard and allow for a healing process to begin. Pessimistic voices, such as Dr. James Okuk- a renowned political analyst and lecturer at the University of Juba-  however, fear that the dialogues would not accomplish its objectives as some of the past peace initiatives.

This pessimist view is drawn from the belief that past peace agreements in South Sudan have been found largely exclusive, and have neglected the local voices. The 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement is one such peace negotiation, despite the fact that it led to South Sudan's secession, it had limited inclusion of the local voices (which mostly included religious groups) and largely failed to cater to internal conflicts in Southern Sudan in the agreements. These unresolved issues later played an integral role in the intensity of the 2013 civil war. Months following the outbreak of the 2013 conflict, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) led a 2015 high-level peace Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (ARCSS) that remains poorly implemented by the government. Leading IGAD to form a high revitalization forum with a mandate to restore a ceasefire, fully implement the ARCSS, and ensure elections take place according to the ARCSS. Most of these initiatives occur at high-level interactions, and are difficult for trickling down to the ground level in South Sudan. The unfortunate truth is that without participation and buy-in from citizens, peace stands no chance.

The question now remains whether the National Dialogue will present an avenue for true reconciliation and peace, or if will it fail like all the preceding peace processes.

Let Us All Dialogue

The National Dialogue's 100-member steering committee has been conducting consultations on the underscoring causes of the prevailing violent conflict, with different stakeholders at different levels throughout the counties and states of South Sudan. The multilevel consultations are done with the aim of providing a report to the National Conference, which will prepare a report for the President and give final submission to the Parliament for adoption and implementation. The National Dialogue therefore presents an opportunity for both local and communal-level groups and organizations to express their grievances to the Government of South Sudan (GoSS), and at the same time, the GoSS has a chance to hear some of the issues affecting its citizens. This dialogue process could increase the diversity of solutions offered to mitigate the conflict. It could further allow the GoSS and international society to tailor solutions according to the specific communities and their emerging issues.

Importance of Multi-leveled Integration

South Sudan's multi-tiered conflict calls for careful rethinking of how the international community and GoSS approach peace processes. The complexity of this war affects society from top to bottom, and therefore calls for a reconciliation of top-down and bottom-up approaches to peace efforts. The top-down approach utilized thus far in the high-level negotiated peace agreements has failed to end the conflict and address underlying grievances. This has not only highlighted the weaknesses of a narrow and high-level approach, but has also highlighted the consequences of excluding bottom-up approaches to peacebuilding. South Sudan needs to strengthen both its top-down and bottom-up approaches through engaging local organizations, communal groups, religious organizations, and marginalized groups, such as women and youth.

The importance of multi-leveled integration in peace is often recognized in policy documents and public statements, such as the United Nations resolution 2282 of 2016, but rarely acted on. It is thus important that the National Dialogue maintain a very close relationship with local and national level actors in the conflict. The GoSS should therefore encourage participation from different states and counties in South Sudan.

Previously excluded, South Sudanese communities are now able to discuss and engage with peace agreements due to the dialogues. This is a chance for both the National Dialogue Committee and the government to accommodate views, and address issues that were not present in previous peace agreements. It could also be a great opportunity for citizens to hold the government accountable by expressing their sentiments, and by potentially finding possible alternatives to the government's failed peace agreement implementation.

Operational Challenges of Local Actors in the National Dialogue

Nevertheless, the potential obstacles facing the National Dialogue are significant. There is the challenge of bringing together communities that are currently in conflict with each other. Forcing interaction between groups in active conflict has sometimes led to more aggravation, and has not achieved significant progress. Additionally, there is a challenge in the capacity of inclusivity. This refers to the ability of the committee to manage a large number of participants who present different views and opinions.

The National Dialogue remains dependent on the ability of its leaders and steering committee to include relevant swaths of the population. This can include the youth, traditional leaders, representatives of the opposition, women, and religious groups among others. Additionally, with such a diverse participation, the facilitators need to be neutral and clearly set the parameters of discussion. Further, the moderators of the dialogue must be trained to handle disputes that could occur that might negatively affect the productivity of the discussions.

Moving forward, the steering committee and the government have to remain committed to the National Dialogue in order for it to address the root causes of the crises afflicting the country. They must also sincerely consider the resulting recommendations, and develop meaningful policies and mechanisms to address said recommendations.

Emmaculate Liaga is a Doctoral Candidate at University of Pretoria, South Africa. She was a former Southern Voices Scholar Network for Peacebuilding in Fall 2017.