approach to peace (section 5) and two important qualifications (section 6). First it provides ashort background of the three conflicts and the peace agreements (section 2).
2. CPA, DPA and ESPA in context
Comprehensive Peace Agreement
(CPA) was signed on 9 January 2005 by theGovernment of Sudan (mainly composed of the National Congress Party (NCP)) and theSudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A).
After over a decade of negotiationsfacilitated by the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD), an East Africanregional organisation, the CPA concluded Africa’s longest civil war. The conflict over self-determination of the South, the role of religion in the state, sharing of political power andresources had taken over two million lives and had uprooted over four million people.As its title suggests, the CPA is comprehensive in that it is an agreement that spans a range of issues. It is an example of modern peace agreements that do not only attempt to resolve issuesdirectly related to the conflict, but also contain elements aimed at reshaping fundamentalaspects of the state and society. The CPA attempts to resolve issues directly related to theconflict. It grants substantial competencies to the South, such as participation in the nationalgovernment, establishes an autonomous Government of Southern Sudan and provides for thesharing of revenues from Southern oil and a referendum on external self-determination by2011. However, the CPA is also, in line with the vision of the late SPLM Chairman Dr JohnGarang, a roadmap for a
. The philosophy is that the Southerners will not opt for secession if the parties make “unity attractive” through fundamental changes in the style of Sudanese governance.
It contains a catalogue of human rights, provides for a Government of National Unity, a new constitution, substantial decentralisation and democratic elections before 2009. In all these aspects, the CPA is more than a cessation of hostilities between the National Government and the South; it changes the essence of how those occupying the palace in Khartoum have governed the country since its independence in 1956.At least, it would if the CPA was implemented, which happens in fits and starts. Whereasmost of the important
(Government of National Unity, Government of SouthernSudan, National Assembly, Southern Sudan Assembly, state governments and assemblies andseveral independent commissions) have been established, the major
are still to take place (census, elections, referendums).
The most important criticism of the CPA has been that it is “incomprehensive” in that it is a bilateral agreement between the most powerful parties of the North (NCP) and the South(SPLM). In the CPA, the two parties determined how Sudan’s political and economic cakewas to be divided. Exemplary is their agreement on the power sharing percentages for theexecutive and legislative at the national, southern and state level. At the national level, for instance, they allocated themselves 80% of the seats in the National Assembly and NationalExecutive (52% for the NCP and 28% for the SPLM), only leaving 20% for the opposition
The Comprehensive Peace Agreement, signed on 9 January 2005, available athttp://www.unmis.org/english/documents/cpa-en.pdf (last accessed 4 April 2007).
Idem, tenth preambular paragraph (‘The parties further acknowledge that the successful implementation of theCPA shall provide a model for good governance in the Sudan that will help create a solid basis to preserve peaceand make unity attractive and therefore undertake to fully adhere to the letter and spirit of the CPA so as toguarantee lasting peace, security for all, justice and equality in the Sudan’).
See for the implementation of the CPA, the
, written by the United Nations Mission in the Sudan,available at http://www.unmis.org/english/cpaMonitor.htm (last accessed 4 April 2007).