After the South Sudan referendum last January proceeded without a hitch and North Sudan acquiesced to South Sudan's secession in July, there were suspicions that this was too good to be true. The sticking point was the Abyei district, rich in both oil and scarce water resources, in the center of the country.
This week the North sent in tanks to seize the area that was to have a special vote to determine its future. This represented a blatant violation of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement prohibiting the two sides from employing troops in the disputed region.
The head of the Senate US Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry, warned that Sudan is "ominously close to the precipice of war" and mouthed the usual platitudes about the needs for "both sides to reduce tensions". Senator Kerry had invested a great deal in bringing about a presumed peaceful solution to a 22 year old Civil War that has resulted in 2 million deaths.
Sudan clashed with the United Nations Security Council and meetings between council representatives and the Sudanese foreign minister and vice president were canceled.
Russia’s U.N. Ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, called the canceled meetings a missed chance to seek a diplomatic solution. On Sunday, the Security Council condemned “the escalatory military operations being conducted by the Sudanese Armed Forces.” The Khartoum government claimed that the military measures were a response to the South's ambushing a UN escorted convoy of its troops. The Council had condemned that attack as well.
Observers, in attempting to explain the action by the North, have come up with a number of theories:
Both the North and the South consider the disputed region important economically and have key allies in the region and therefore will contest it even militarily.
The North has taken over the region in an attempt to provoke the South into a military response. This could be the needed pretext for thwarting South Sudanese independence. Sudanese leader, Omar Bashir, knows that many African leaders are uneasy with the secession of Southern Sudan, as many African countries harbor similar religious and tribal fault lines. In the event of renewed warfare, they may be tempted to back Bashir over this principle.
The move is an attempt to improve the North's bargaining position over the unresolved issues such as the disposition of oil resources.
It may also be a way for Sudanese President Bashir to improve his negotiating position vis-a-vis the international community. The United States, under the Obama administration, has offered to remove Sudan from the list of states that sponsor terror (Sudan once hosted bin Laden) provide debt relief and appoint an ambassador. However this may not suffice because of Omar Bashir who is still facing charges from the international criminal court over genocide in the Darfur region.
The United States and France have pushed for a one-year reprieve for the Sudanese leader. This may not be enough. Speaking in the European Parliament on Tuesday, ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said the court would eventually catch up with Bashir.
"The EU is concentrating in the south ... but for us, al-Bashir is still committing huge crimes in Darfur." Perhaps the reprieve for Bashir could be extended indefinitely in return for cooperation.