Given the proximity and our regional interconnectedness, the problems inherent in the ongoing conflict in South Sudan make it our problem. And, in view of the fits and starts in the process to end the misunderstanding between President Salva Kiir and rebel leader Riek Machar, we can only work to ensure that the signing of the ceasefire deal this week in Addis Ababa holds true. This is the seventh ceasefire agreement since fighting began in November 2013. Clashes engulfed the country in a conflict which now involves 20 armed groups, leaving tens of thousands dead with over a million people displaced in a country of 12 million. Conflict has never been welcome. The ceasefire, therefore, needs to be more than the paper it is signed on. Urging them on to ensure that the conflict stops – whatever it takes – including wielding well-meant stick, is the eight-member eastern Africa bloc, the Inter-governmental Authority on Development (Igad). Igad continues to be at the forefront trying to broker peace in the world’s youngest state. And should the ceasefire not hold this time, they have promised to hold the range of individual protagonists in the conflict personally responsible. Despite previous threats to impose sanctions, the bloc says this time it will act tougher and take any ceasefire violations to the UN Security Council and the African Union’s Peace and Security Council. One should hope Igad also holds firm in its threat as the continued conflict in South Sudan promises to be costly in human and financial terms. An analysis by the London-based consultancy firm, Frontier Economics, suggests that the conflict could cost Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, Uganda and Tanzania a combined $53 billion if it lasts another five years as they deal with refugees, security needs and other spillover effects. Beyond the generality of what “spillover” means, the knock-on effect will not leave Rwanda and Burundi unscathed, as members of the East African Community. More broadly, resolving the conflict by the end of 2015 would save the international community close to US$30 billion. Negotiations will resume on February 20 with Igad giving the warring sides one last chance to reach a final agreement by March 5. This, therefore, has to be the year. Failure means the costs will be highly debilitating at the national level. The analysis, titled, South Sudan: The Cost of War (An estimation of the economic and financial costs of ongoing conflict), forecasts the country would forego up to $28 billion in economic growth if the war were to continue. The costs for South Sudan in terms of lost growth opportunities over a 20 year period could be between US$122 billion and US$158 billion in today’s prices. This is more than 12 times South Sudan’s current GDP. The analysis, done in collaboration with South Sudan’s Centre for Peace and Development Studies and Uganda’s Centre for Conflict Resolution, urges swift intervention and calls on Igad to step up pressure on the South Sudan government and rebels. “Without a swift end to the fighting, South Sudan runs the risk of becoming a failed state. Worse still, it could become the epicentre of a full-blown regional conflict.” As I write this, the European Union has added its voice, and is seeking the involvement of the international community in South Sudan peace talks citing “lack of progress in peace process”. This goes to show the level of international concern. The EU spokesperson emphasizes that the conflict has been a disaster for the people of South Sudan and has put at risk the stability of the entire region. An unstable region, especially one as volatile as ours, means the entire region is at risk of the “spillover effects”, which no one can say where it could end with the Islamic and other terrorists also lurking. The writer is a commentator on local and regional issues.
