| |
A
well-researched but limited analysis of the causes of war in Sudan
The
Root Causes of Sudan’s Civil Wars by Douglas H. Johnson. Publisher: Indiana University Press,
Bloomington and Indianapolis, 2004. Pp.: 234. Pbk: £12.95/$24.95.
By
Nasr Salem
For
outsiders and non-specialists, the on-going crisis in the province of Darfur, western Sudan, has brought to light the fact that the Sudan’s
long-drawn-out predicament is made up not of one civil war but rather
of several, sometimes interlocking, civil wars. If anything, elucidating the nature of these
civil wars requires an understanding of the historical patterns that shaped
inter-communal tensions for decades – and perhaps centuries – until they
erupted into protracted civil strife.
But internal wars often present outside players with opportunities
to interfere in the affairs of countries mired in civil strife, and Sudan’s
impasse has been no exception.
Douglas
H. Johnson’s well-researched book grew out of a report he was commissioned
to write for international workers carrying out relief efforts in the
country. The author attempts to
provide “a broad explanation of the origins of the Sudan’s multiple and recurring civil wars, and why these wars have not ended”
(p. xi). He describes his line of analysis as
one that debunks such notions as the “age-old confrontation between ‘cultures’
defined by bloodlines (‘Arabs’ vs. ‘Africans’),” and “the consequence
of an artificial division imposed by colonial powers” (pp. xi-xii). He also reserves some critical remarks for human
rights groups because they “seem still in search of the ideal liberation
group” or striving “to apportion blame equally”, with “pious even-handedness”
(p. xii).
But
Johnson’s experience with international relief organizations working in
Sudan has
apparently clouded his vision, causing him in the process to adopt their
anti-Khartoum moralizing and, hence, to advocate a cause and take sides. His claim to debunk stereotypes in favour of
knowing and understanding “the economic and political patterns which have
affected the development and exercise of state power in the Sudan since
at least the nineteenth century” (p. xii) does not stand up to close scrutiny.
His narrative is nothing short of an openly biased account that
does not shy away from blaming the drive to implement the Shari’ah in
Sudan for
providing conditions conducive to the eruption and perpetuation of civil
strife.
Perhaps
the most serious of the flaws borne out of Johnson’s bias is his uneven
approach to the pronouncements of various governmental actors.
Whereas he is reluctant to take the pronouncements of the Sudanese
government at face value, he displays an uncritical acceptance of the
US’s attitudes
and policies towards Sudan. Take, for example, his explanation of the Clinton administration’s
foreign policy stands towards Sudan: “Khartoum’s hostility
to its neighbours became a factor in defining the US’s attitude
towards its former ally. Association
with other militant Islamists such as Hamas and Usama bin Laden, and continuing
ties with Iraq and Iran were further reasons for the US condemnation of
the Sudan as a terrorist state, and for its reason to support regional
defence schemes for the Sudan’s most exposed neighbours” (p. 102). This sounds more like a statement coming straight
out of a US governmental press release than a nuanced scholarly analysis.
The
author argues that “the origins of the Sudan’s
current problems predate the unequal legacy of the colonial system in
the twentieth century” (p. 7). He traces these origins to the pre-colonial
era, when successive states, based in the predominantly Arab and Muslim
north, treated the south of the country, a polyglot mixture of nationalities,
ethnicities, religious denominations and tribal communities, as a sort
of milch cow – a source of wealth, food resources and slaves. This exploitative relationship between the northern
states and the south continued during Egyptian rule and the “Mahdist state”.
British colonialism not only failed to mitigate these patterns
of exploitation but also contributed to the emergence of new disparities
between the north and the south. For instance, the Closed District Ordinance,
which was enacted in the 1920s to prevent non-southerners from settling
in the south with an eye at extirpating the internal slave-trade and halting
the spread of Islam into non-Muslim areas, failed “to stimulate a southern
Sudanese commercial class to balance the influence of trading companies
based in the northern Sudan” (p. 17).
Worse still, Johnson notes, the “exploitative nature of the central
state towards its rich, but uncontrolled hinterland … re-emerged with
force in the Sudan since
independence, especially during the Nimairi period” (p. 7).
Johnson
demonstrates that the early sparks of the first civil war in the Sudan emerged
in the years preceding independence from British colonial rule, and were
in many ways linked to the drive to impose a unitary state fusing the
various regions together in a single nation-state. One factor contributing to the souring of inter-communal
relations at the time was the fact that the Sudanization commission, charged
with replacing colonial civil servants with Sudanese, appointed northerners
“to all the senior positions in the South. Most politically active Southerners
saw this as the beginning of Northern colonization of the South” (p. 27).
The 1955 Mutiny in Torit by soldiers of the Equatorial Corps, “whose
British officers had only recently been replaced by northern Sudanese
officers” (p. 27), was triggered by the soldiers’ fears of being disarmed
and moved to the north. Thus, when the British left in 1956, all the
ingredients of civil strife were present, complete with a group of mutinous
soldiers, who retreated to the bush, forming the core of an armed movement
using guerrilla tactics in pursuit of ‘self-determination.’ Interestingly, the guerrillas, who were knit
together very loosely, “became known colloquially by the vernacular name
of a type of poison – Anyanya.” On
the other hand, southern leaders who went into exile formed a political
movement that “eventually called itself the Sudan African Nationalist
Movement (SANU) in emulation of the East African nationalist parties”
(p. 31).
Beset
by internal dissension and divisions along ethnic and tribal lines, the
movement underwent a series of internal purges and coups that culminated
in the formation of the Southern Sudan Liberation Movement.
Lengthy negotiations between a new military regime headed by Jaafar
Nimairi and the SSLM resulted in the Addis Ababa Agreement in 1972. Through Johnson’s prism the reader revisits
how the peace agreement, which established the Southern Regional Government,
collapsed under the weight of its own structural contradictions and flaws,
infusing in the process added complexity to the country’s predicament. For instance, the issue of the borders of the
Southern Region “became entwined with the issue of oil and economic development.
In November 1980 the new National Assembly considered a bill to
set the boundaries of the new regions in the North.
At Hassan al-Turabi’s instigation, the bill redrew the Southern
Region’s boundaries, placing the oilfields of Bentiu and the agriculturally
productive areas of Upper Nile Province inside
neighbouring northern provinces. The action
provoked an immediate confrontation between the Southern Regional Government
and the National Assembly, which was solved by appeal to the President
of the Republic” (p. 45). Johnson,
who makes little effort to conceal his anti-Muslim predisposition, blames
the Islamic banks, which contributed to the growth of agro-industry in
the Sudan, for contributing to the displacement of large numbers of people in
the south and “interference … in their access to pastures and water” (p.
49).
Against
the backdrop of the complex and unresolved issues borne out of flaws in
the Addis Ababa Agreement, the second civil war began in January 1983,
again with a mutiny that broke out when a battalion of southern Sudanese
soldiers refused to obey an order to move north. In the summer of that year a new political organization
was formed, the Southern People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), with an
armed wing, the Southern People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), led by John
Garang and maintaining close links with Ethiopia. Despite Johnson’s clearly partisan tone on the
side of armed groups in southern Sudan, these
groups’ human-rights violations, political blunders and strategic errors
dot his analysis. His narrative
includes grisly portraits of the cycle of raiding, attacks and counter-attacks
against civilian populations, with many excesses by all sides involved
in the fighting, effectively turning the war into a vicious campaign against
civilians and “ultimately drawing new regions into the civil war” (p.
80).
In
the areas under its control, the SPLA/M set up a Stalinist-like system
of administration and rule, where “the leadership relied on force rather
than persuasion to maintain cohesion. Dissenters were removed while
the causes of dissension were not, and the civil base of the Movement
was neglected in favour of the military organization” (p. 91). Paradoxically, Johnson shows how the SPLA/M
drive to achieve cohesion by force ended up fostering factionalism that
fuelled in-fighting between the various factions of the “split SPLA” in
the 1990s. This in-fighting helped the government to expand
its control over key oilfields in the South.
Ethiopian
patronage would later come to haunt the SPLA/M.
The rebels maintained bases in southwestern Ethiopia. This fact drew them “increasingly
into Ethiopia’s internal war” that preceded the fall of the Mengistu regime. The SPLA’s military fortunes suffered a serious
reversal with the collapse of the Mengistu government in May 1991. “The New Provisional Government of Ethiopia
was not only hostile to the SPLA but had close links with the Sudanese
army. It handed
over all of the old Ethiopian government’s security files on the SPLA”
(p. 88).
The
narrative concludes with reflections about the different ideas of peace
and war as well as on the notions of what anthropologists call a ‘moral
community’ prevalent among the various communities in the Sudan. Johnson notes that there exists
“in the Sudan today numerous moral communities which the current civil wars are
in the process of making exclusive of each other” (p. 173). This does not bode well for the future of Sudan. It makes it hard for one to be optimistic about
the durability and long-term sustainability of the current peace process.
Johnson’s
book provides a useful and lucid portrait of the complicated civil wars
gripping the Sudan. But unfortunately there is much too much chaff
with the wheat in his book. In
a nutshell, The Root Causes of Sudan’s Civil Wars is not a work of scholarship
but rather one that combines elements of both speculative and learned
analysis with advocacy.
|
|