|
|
 Re: السودان 2012 سيناريوهات للمستقبل-Sudan 2010 Scenarios for the future (Re: abubakr)
|
استنتاجات
Conclusions
The four scenarios described above intend to give a picture of how Sudan might look in 2012 in the four different quadrants of a cross determined by the two key uncertainties: 1) In 2012, will Sudan be united or will the North and South have gone separate ways? 2) In 2012, will there be a new war between the North and the South of Sudan, or will there be no war between the North and the South?
Main findings
First, it is very likely that violence and armed conflict will continue in Sudan, and that the present situation will deteriorate. The conflict may be between the North and the South, and may be fought through the use of divide and rule strategies which also stimulate North-North or South-South conflicts. If the North and South separate peacefully, they are likely to each have their own internal conflicts. In fact, even in the most peaceful ‘CPA Hurray!’ scenario, small-scale conflicts are still likely. Given the likelihood of continuing armed conflict, it may not be wise to direct all long-term attention to development rather than humanitarian assistance.
Second, although in theory all four scenarios are possible, from an outsider’s perspective the
’CPA Hurray!’ scenario – the only one that promises a less violent future – appears less
plausible. As a strategy, it is worth pursuing, while at the same time preparing for what happens if this strategy fails.
Third, the organisation of free and fair elections is essential, not only to guarantee peace, but as the only peaceful way to bring about unity, as in the ‘CPA Hurray!’ scenario.
Fourth, continuous outside mediation and pressure is needed to get all parties to implement the CPA and to make unity attractive. In order to be able to do this, the time horizon for the parties needs to be extended. This is only possible to a limited extent, because the flexibility of the Sudanese system has reached its limits and deadlines, such as for the referendum, cannot be postponed indefinitely. The Sudanese need to talk about the post-2012 period, and also make the pre-2012 period more manageable by entering into discussions, for example, about what unity might look like.
Fifth, the critical difference between a successful and unsuccessful outcome will to a large extent be determined by whether the South has a stable, cooperative and confident leadership.
Reflections on the scenarios
It is remarkable how much similarity there was in how the different groups participating in the workshops in Malakal, Juba, Bor and Khartoum described each quadrant. Most differences were merely in accent and emphasis. For example, groups in the South described ‘Be Careful What You Wish For: Somalia?’ as a more peaceful, ‘fantasy’ scenario. But in response to the question whether there would be conflicts in that scenario and, if so, between whom, existing internal southern conflicts always entered the debate.
In theory, all four scenarios are equally possible. In practice, the likelihood of each scenario was regarded differently in the North and the South. In the workshops in the South, the participants deemed a renewed war between the North and the South next to unavoidable. Their argument was that the North would never let the South become independent and that war would be the result. At the same time, Southerners found it hard to imagine that the South could freely choose unity. As a result, they argued that ‘Border Wars’ especially, but also ‘The Last War Revisited?’, were the most likely scenarios. At the same time, they preferred a scenario of secession and no war, while hoping that the South remains united. The scenario ‘CPA Hurray!’ was deemed a very beautiful but unrealistic dream.
In the North, a renewed war between the North and the South was regarded as less likely. It was argued that the North is war weary and that most Arabs no longer want to send their sons to a far and distant part of the country with which they have little in common. They argued that ‘Be Careful What You Wish For: Somalia?’ is a very likely outcome, although they clearly preferred ‘CPA Hurray!’, which they saw as a romantic but possible scenario. In fact, many argued that all efforts should be directed at ensuring that ‘CPA Hurray!’ becomes a reality, because the other options should not be regarded as viable alternatives. In government-related circles, the ‘CPA Hurray!’ scenario was clearly preferred, although they hoped for a large stake for the NCP.
In the North, a fifth scenario (a second one in the United and Peace quadrant) was identified, on the basis of a third key uncertainty – will there or will there not be elections and a referendum? In this scenario, called ‘Stagnation’, the elections and the referendum never take
place because the elites in power in Khartoum and Juba have little to gain from them, and prefer the present situation to continue. The Sudanese and international actors would muddle through, continuing to ‘band aid’ the Sudanese system together. There would be close cooperation between the Khartoum and Juba-based elites. Although the country would formally still be one, in the North, marginalised areas – such as Darfur – would rebel against Khartoum, while in the South the marginalised areas would fight the Southern centre, Juba. Again, this scenario is very chaotic and violent, partly because ever since the signing of the CPA the parties have been muddling through and using ‘band aid’ solutions to keep the process on track. As a result, the system has lost most of its flexibility and few further adjustments are possible within the context of the CPA framework. Deadlines become increasingly more difficult to meet. With CPA implementation becoming more and more patched together, continuing with a muddling through and ‘band aid’ approach might end up with the patient having passed away. Some parts of the Southern elites, especially, will not accept further muddling through. Although this scenario is certainly plausible, it was decided not to describe it further because – in its essence on the ground – it is not very different from
‘Be Careful What You Wish For: Somalia?’.
|
|
  
|
|
|
|
abubakr
فيس بوك
تويتر
انستقرام
يوتيوب
بنتيريست