BRISBANE MODEL UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE

SECURITY COUNCIL

BRIEFING paper

APRIL | 4 - 7 | 2013 | NATHAN CAMPUS | GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY

//THE SECURITY COUNCIL

The United Nations Security Council is the paramount organ of the United Nations charged with the maintenance of International Peace and Security. It is characterised by the capacity, granted in the Charter of the UN, to issue resolutions on behalf of and which may or may not be binding upon all member states of the UN. The Security Council features the permanent membership of the People’s Republic of China, the French Republic, the Russian Federation, the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Island, all of whom hold the power to veto the adoption of any resolution.

The Security Council is empowered to make non-binding recommendations on the pacific settlement of disputes under Chapter VI, and, in situations involving threats to or breaches of the peace, may take binding action, including sanctions and embargoes, authorising the use of armed force or the deployment of peacekeeping operations under Chapter VII. The Security Council has also been granted power by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to refer situations to the Court and thus grant jurisdiction over them, or to temporarily defer cases currently being investigated.

//BORDER CONFLICTS BETWEEN SUDAN AND SOUTH SUDAN

This briefing paper will seek to assist delegates in forming a resolution to current conflict and uncertainty over the disputed border regions between the Republic of Sudan and the Republic of South Sudan. It will first present a brief historical overview of the Sudanese civil war leading up to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2005, an analysis of that Peace Agreement and it’s execution in the referendum of 2011 for the secession of South Sudan, and developments in the conflict since then.

//HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

The Sudanese Civil War has been one of the most long-running, protracted and bloody of conflicts in modern Africa. Animosity between the predominantly Arab Muslim north and Christian or Animist Black south can be traced well past even the introduction of the British Empire to Egyptian expansion under the Caliphates. The trade in black african slaves by arab muslims predates the european slave trade by

hundreds of years. Under the system of colonial administration known as the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium, the Egyptian sultanate retained de jure independence from the British Empire (although in practise the British controlled all decisions taken by the sultan and garrisoned troops in Egypt), while the British and Egyptians undertook to jointly manage the Sudan as a colonial possession. Initially the colonial authorities administered the North and South as distinct entities, partially in recognition of their cultural and religious divide, however tensions flared when the two were merged into one administrative region in furtherance of British Middle Eastern policy. Tensions were heightened with the 1953 agreement between the UK and Egypt to grant independence to Sudan as one country because of fears in the south that the country would be exclusively controlled in the North, and conflict broke out in the lead up to the 1 Jan 1956 Independence date which, while initially a small insurgency stemming from army mutinies, burgeoned into the first Sudanese Civil War. Conflict raged for close to 17 years, leaving over 500,000 dead and many more displaced, before eventually before eventually mediation by the World Council of Churches and All African Council of Churches lead to the Addis Ababa Agreement in 1972 granted an end to the first civil war and a fragile peace which would be again shattered in 1983. The Second Sudanese Civil war between 1983 and 2005 is generally seen as a continuation of the previous war, characterised by the founding of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army in response, among other causes, to attempts to seize control over crucial oil fields around the border region having been discovered since the end of the first civil war. Over 22 years of conflict approximately 2 million Sudanese have been killed and 4 million displaced, including massive displacement to refugee camps in Ethiopia and Kenya which remain to this day. The conflict was finally ended through the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), a process occurring between 2002 and 2005 and describes a number of agreements which culminated in a final agreement in 2005 in Naivasha, the key plank of which was that South Sudan would hold a referendum in 2011 to determine whether it would secede as it’s own state or remain part of a unified Sudan. The referendum was successfully held from the 9th to 15th of January 2011 and on the 7th of

February it was announced that 98.83% of voters had favoured independence. On the 9th of July 2011 the independent state of South Sudan was born.

//KEY ISSUES OF THE CURRENT CONFLICTS

Regions not determined by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement: Three areas were specifically dealt with in the collection of agreements constituting the CPA separately to the provision for a referendum on the independence of the South: Abyei (through the Protocol on the Resolution of the Conflict in Abyei Area), South Kordofan and the Blue Nile States (both through the Protocol on the Resolution of the Conflict in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile States); none of whose status has been formally settled. Despite the original 2002 Machakos Proposal defining the South as the area of independence in 1956 (an area which included none of the three disputed regions), SPLA negotiators continued to push for rights to referenda specific to these regions and succeeded in negotiating the addition protocols relating to those issues. This briefing paper will focus on the Abyei region, but delegates are encouraged to research the issues in both Blue Nile States and South Kordofan.

//ABYEI

Abyei, a district crucial to oil production since exploration in the 70s and 80s discovered oil in the region, was unsurprisingly one of the key sticking points in negotiation of the CPA, particularly as to whether it would remain in under Northern control or move with a newly independent south if the (then) proposed referendum succeeded. After concerted pressure from the US, a Protocol on the Resolution of the Abyei conflict was adopted which granted a special administrative status on the area, the precise borders of which were to be delimited by an arbitral body, the Abyei Borders Commission. Finally, a referendum was to be held within the defined region to decide whether Abyei would join the north or south. The report of the Borders Commission, presented on the 14th of July 2005, was rejected by the Government of the Republic of Sudan, and conflict broke out in late 2007 – early 2008. Subsequently both parties agreed to submit their disputes over the Borders Commission finding to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which in June of 2009 ordered the redrawing of the borders of the region, decreasing it’s size and rendering it more

demographically more likely to vote for joining the South in the planned referendum. However, the planned referendum never came to pass: in May of 2011, the Sudanese Armed Forces captured Abyei, displacing approximately 20,000 people. In June the UN Interim Security Force for Abyei, consisting of Ethiopian troops, were deployed under Security Council resolution 1990.

//POSITIONS OF KEY ACTORS IN THE CONFLICTS

African Union: As the key non-state actor in the region, the African Union (AU) has been heavily involved in providing peacefully means through which to end the border conflicts between Sudan and South Sudan and deliver a mutually beneficial for solution for both states. In bearing in mind the interests of the broader African community, the AU is aware that the ongoing conflict also has implications on the broader African region, particularly in those states that neighbour the Sudan and South Sudan, including Ethiopia and the Central African Republic. As a result of the ongoing Sudanese conflict these neighbouring states have been faced with increasing levels of refugees, and stretching of already limited resources. In April 2012 the AU presented its formal position on the conflict, expressing its concern for the prevailing violence and disputes along the border region and the resulting humanitarian crisis. Further, the AU affirmed its commitment to respect the territorial integrity of both states and stressed that any territorial disputes must be resolved through negotiations, not conflict. As part of this formal position, the AU proposed a 7-step Roadmap in order to ease current tensions, facilitate return to negotiations and normalise relations between the two states. Following the reported beginnings of the withdrawal of Sudanese and South Sudanese forces from the disputed border areas, the AU has called for the UN to support and assist in the facilitation of the peace process between the two states.

//ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION IN A RESOLUTION

Broadly speaking, there are three key issues that a Security Council Resolution should address in order to provide a comprehensive attempt to peacefully resolve the ongoing conflict and provision for post-conflict peace settlement. Cessation of hostilities and the enforcement of a safe demilitarised border zone: Following reports of the cessation of most violence and conflict in the border region and the start of the withdrawal of Sudanese and South Sudanese troops from the agreed demilitarised zone, a priority of the UN should be to ensure that a return to previous hostilities is not an option. Whilst a demilitarised zone has been agreed upon, enforcement of this may prove to be an issue in the future. Furthermore inter-communal violence, assisted by the availability of weaponry, continues to dampen long term peace prospects and thus warrants consideration. Negotiating the final status of Abyei: As a district crucial to the production of oil, and thus an important economic region, the status of Abyei needs to be resolved. Moreover resolution of the status of Abyei is a priority as only when such territorial disputes are resolved can the territorial integrity of each state be recognised, and cease to be a cause for conflict and dispute. Humanitarian Crisis: As a result of the ongoing conflict and increased numbers of refugees and displaced persons, there significant humanitarian crisis in the region, already faced with overstretched resources and a lack of food and water. With reports establishing that around 700 000 people are currently affected by the humanitarian crisis in South Kordofan and the Blue Nile, a successful resolution should place considerable emphasis on the delivery of humanitarian aid in order to avert this crisis from worsening. A crucial part of this is ensuring that the Sudanese and South Sudanese governments cooperate with the UN and any relevant non-governmental organisations to safeguard the access of aid workers, as well as the delivery of resources and services to the affected areas.

//RESOURCES FOR FURTHER READING

African Union Roadmap, April 2012:h t t p : // w w w . s u d a n t r i b u n e . c o m / s p i p .php?iframe&page=imprimable&id_article=42402 UN Security Council Resolution 2057 (2012):ht tp://www.secur itycounci l repor t .org/at f/c f / %7 B 6 5 B F C F 9 B - 6 D 2 7- 4 E 9 C- 8 C D 3 -CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_res_2057.pdf Human Rights Watch World Reports 2013 on Sudan:http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2013/country-chapters/sudan And South Sudan:http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2013/country-chapters/south-sudan