![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
After its hard-won independence in 2011, South Sudan slid quickly into violent conflict and became a theatre of enormous human suffering. This article attempts to answer the question of what went wrong, and what prospects exist for South Sudanese to forge a resilient social contract to build and sustain peace. It employs an analytical framework postulating three drivers of such a contract, at the heart of which is how core issues of conflict that underpin violent conflict and fragility have been addressed. The research findings underscore that the way the ruling elites managed the transition to statehood, the development of exclusive weak institutions, and frail social cohesion have all served to undermine peace and the development of a resilient social contract. Core issues of conflict have not been addressed, witnessed by the eruption of civil war in 2013. While the 2015 Peace Agreement provides, at least on paper, the basis for forging a new social contract that holds promise for sustaining peace, building inclusive institutions and nurturing social cohesion, its realization requires political will, strategic leadership, and a national vision, which are currently in short supply.
Acknowledgements
This article is based on the case study in the overall study titled ‘Forging Resilient Social Contracts’. The author would like to thank Erin McCandless, research director of the overall study and her team and FES and UNDP for their support. The author would also like to thank Mr Christopher Oringa, lecturer at University of Juba, for collecting primary data from key informants and focus group discussions in a rather difficult research environment in South Sudan.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and are not an official policy or position of the National Defense University, the Department of Defense, the U.S. Government, University of Juba or Peace Research Institute Oslo.
Notes on contributor
Luka Biong D. Kuol is a Professor at the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, US National Defense University. He is also an Associate Professor at the University of Juba, South Sudan and a Global Fellow at Peace Research Institute Oslo. He holds a PhD from the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, UK.
Notes
1 As defined in this study, ‘a dynamic national agreement between state and society, including different groups in society, on how to live together, and notably, around how power is distributed and exercised’.
2 The selection of these two core conflict issues provides nuance in the analysis of the dynamic of engagement between state and society and between and among different groups in society in forging relations and managing conflict.
3 There were 26 focus group discussions conducted with each group consisting of 6–8 participants. Most of the focused discussion groups were youth (8), women (7), chiefs (5), religious leaders (1), and business community (5).
4 110 questionnaires were administered through direct interview or self-administered by key informants. The profile of respondents was diverse, from the former Equatoria region (40 per cent or 44 key informants), the former Bahr el Ghazal region (31 per cent or 34 key informants) and the former Upper Nile region (29 per cent or 32 key informants) with majority male (65 per cent) and 35 per cent female. Most key informants are more than 40 years of age (49 per cent) with post-secondary diploma (50 per cent) and university degree (14 per cent) and working with government (50 per cent) and NGOs and United Nations organizations (30 per cent). Given the deteriorating security situation and limited space for freedom of expression, the focus group discussions were conducted in Juba; the capital city in which most ethnic groups reside. Each of these focus group discussions deliberated on the core conflict issues and the postulated three drivers of resilient social contract. Key informant interviews were guided by detailed questionnaires, filled by key informants either through direct interview or self-administered. The profile of the key informants is very diverse in terms of region, gender, education, age and employment, a purposive selection that targeted respondents who were educated, available and willing to fill the questionnaire. Most key informants were from the University of Juba, members of parliament, senior officials of government, civil society and religious leaders. Given the huge volume of data gathered from key informants, the Software Package for Social Science (SPSS) was used for data analysis and primary data from focus group discussions were used for triangulation. The aggregate data analysis is provided and the disaggregated regional data analysis is used when there is variation in responses. The former three regions of South Sudan (Bahr el Ghazal, Upper Nile and Equatoria) are used to reflect regional socio-ethnic-political affiliation. Given the low coverage, the perceptions of key informants and focus group discussions cannot be generalized and may only provide trends.
5 For the people of Equatoria, Nuer and Dinka were considered the same and they were all labeled as ‘Dinka’.
6 Kokora is a word in Bari language that means to divide something into different parts.
7 The first ever pan-southern conference was held in Juba in October 1954, attended by 250 delegates representing the three regions/provinces of southern Sudan, chiefs from rural areas and representatives from the southern diaspora in Khartoum unanimously voted in favour of federalism.