KHARTOUM - The Secretary General of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) Pagan Amum talked to The Niles about the planned referendum in Abyei and why the Sudanese president’s planned visit to the south is so important.
Q: What is your agenda and what are the security priorities for you in the light of the Security Committee meeting in Juba?
A: The agenda of the Security Committee or the common security political mechanisms includes how to implement the Security Accord recently signed by Al-Bashir and Salva Kiir in Addis Ababa.
Q: You reportedly refused to include the file of disengagement with the SPLM-Northern Sector in the agenda of the meetings of common committees, and to discuss the existence of other rebellious movements in the South?
A: Both countries have reached an agreement on disengagement and it has been fully implemented. The key issue now is how to develop different mechanisms to monitor that agreement. These include forming specialised committees for monitoring and complaining in case either country violates the agreement or supports armed opposition within the other country.
Q: Some believe that it is difficult to deploy monitoring forces and define a buffer zone given the armed opposition in most of the borders between the two countries, such as SPLM-Northern Sector which says it controls 40 percent of these borders. What do you say about this?
A: Tension inside both countries is an internal concern and security arrangements intended here are designed to realise peace and stability between the two countries.
Q: The Cooperation Agreement is only slowly being implemented. Why?
A: I don’t think that the agreement is slowly implemented. South Sudan has developed the entire arrangements required to implement it and is now hosting the Political Security Committee in order to activate the Security Accord. We have also received Sudanese delegates in order to implement the oil agreement and re-pump oil, as well as to form trade and banking relationship committees and discuss other issues. Implementation is properly carried out in terms of preparations.
Q: How important is Al-Bashir’s planned visit to Juba?
A: It is well known that last March, President Salva Kiir invited President Al-Bashir to hold a mutual summit. Now, if as the visit is after signing the Cooperation Agreement, it will take place in a better and positive climate, and consequently will help the implementation of the Agreement and allow both countries to reach a new stage of work and cooperation for the best interest of both peoples.
Q: Khartoum subjects the President’s visit to progress achieved in the security file by the committees. How far is that possible?
A: If so, then the issue is misinterpreted and political stakes and bargains will be influencing the implementation of the Cooperation Agreement issues since it includes many other issues, most importantly security, re-pumping the South oil through the North territories, trade, borders opening, etc.
Talking about a breakthrough or a progress in the security field implies some kind of bargaining and an attempt to employ the issue to set another agenda for both countries. Now, meetings between the two countries are held to implement the agreement of Addis Ababa. There are no new negotiations between the parties, only meetings to implement the agreed issues.
Q: Has Khartoum rejected Mbeki’s proposal regarding Abyei?
A: This is a crisis between Sudan and both the African Union and the international community. If Khartoum rejects Mbeki’s proposal, all agreements and peace between both countries will be threatened and Sudan alone will be responsible for that.
Q: Do you believe that Mbeki’s proposal is able to solve the complex Abyei problem? Or does it simply play to what Juba wants?
A: The proposal will certainly solve it and put an end to the suffering of the Abyei people by turning a new page in terms of the relationships between the two countries.
The proposal will serve the interests of the grazers and citizens living at the borders between the two countries since it will allow them to move easily and exchange interests as communities, without any political exploitation of small local problems.
Khartoum says that the proposal has deprived Misseriya Arabs of the right to participate in the referendum since October is a rainy month, which makes people’s movement difficult. Additionally, the Misseriya are grazers and this is the time when they depart to other regions.
The Misseriya tribe has its own region and consequently its people determine its future. As for Abyei, Dinka Ngok alone determines its future. On the other hand, Misseriya have the right to reach pastures and water resources in South Sudan across Abyei, and such rights are preserved.
Q: What potentials are there for political solutions other than the referendum?
A: The referendum is the mechanism agreed upon by both parties, which Dinka Ngok tribe and the people of Abyei participate in. The borders of the Dinka Ngok region have been demarcated in The Hague; thus, the referendum is for Dinka Ngok to determine the future of their region, which is also an issue agreed upon by both parties.
Q: Does this mean that South Sudan considers the referendum is for Dinka Ngok only -- not the Misseriya?
A: Yes, since Dinka Ngok are the people of Abyei, the region of the nine districts which belong now to Sudan.
Q: What is Juba’s role in the dialogue about the Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan?
A: The war in Southern Kordofan and the Blue Nile is an inter-Sudanese war. As a neighbouring country, South Sudan is able to help the conflicting parties in Sudan to reach peace and settle the disputed issues, so that Sudan becomes a stable country. We support the Sudanese people in working towards security and stability which serve the interests of both countries.
The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the positions or opinions of the publishers of www.theniles.org