The main purpose of this paper is to analyse the period of the Addis Ababa Peace (1972-1983) in Sudan and the outbreak of the second Sudanese Civil War between North and South Sudan.
This paper assumes that the outbreak of the second civil war took its roots from the struggle between elites to maintain political power and economic enrichment rather than the known ethnocultural or religious differences between the North and the South Sudan.
Table of Contents
1. A Theoretical Prologue
2. Introduction
3. The Background of the First Civil War in Sudan
3.1. The Anya- Nya Movement and the First Civil War
3.2. The Addis Ababa Peace
4. The North Sudanese Government and the Results of the State Weakness
4.1. The Al-Numeiri Regime and the Political Fractions in North Sudan
4.2. The National Reconciliation and the Muslim Brotherhood
5. The South Sudan and Its Motives
5.1. The Southern Self-Government and the new Tensions
5.2. The Emergence of the Sudan Peoples Liberation Army/Movement and the Outbreak of the Second Civil War
6. Conclusion
7. Appendix: Maps
7.1. The Regions of Rebel Activity in Sudan
7.2. Administrative Structure of the South Sudan
8. Bibliography
Objectives and Research Themes
This study analyzes the period of the Addis Ababa Peace (1972-1983) and the subsequent outbreak of the second Sudanese Civil War, examining the conflict through the lens of power struggles between central and regional elites rather than purely ethnocultural or religious differences.
- The role of weak state structures in fostering insurgency.
- Actor-oriented analysis of elite interests and motivations.
- The impact of the collapse of the Addis Ababa Agreement.
- The influence of North-South political maneuvers on the outbreak of violence.
- The role of external linkages and natural resource competition (oil, water).
Excerpt from the Book
3. The Background of the First Civil War in Sudan
The Period of the British Rule in Sudan is the period, in which the north/south cleavages in Sudanese Society became conspicuous (Powell 2003: 176-178). The interactions between the Arab North and the South Sudan were restricted and Sudan was governed as two separate entities. During the 1920s and 1930s, the British Colonial Government ruled these two separate entities through indigenous leaders (Feron, Laitin 2006: 3). As a result of British understanding of colonial governance in Sudan (Powell 2003: 168-169), the North and South Sudan remained completely isolated from each other. On account of this isolation, the appearance of the distinctions between the Arab/Muslim northern culture and the Animist populated southern Nilotes culture was not unpredictable. While the British government fostered the Arabs’ Islamic values and promoted a kind of western type modernization in northern Sudan, they hardly allowed the northerners to travel, trade and work in south provinces. In the South, while the Christian missions were operating schools and hospitals; the Islamic missions, Arab culture and Arab language were discouraged. British government allowed the South only to develop along indigenous lines. The southern Sudan was largely isolated from northern development progress and was provided with only minimal British resources, which had them underdeveloped.
This separate, indirect rule caused two separate political services: In the South, officials were exercised by British colonial officers and in the North; the officers were mainly diplomatic personnel with Arabic descendants. This distinction was also caused “a cultural and political negative identification of the other”. Because of this new identification, both sides began to build new connections with identical neighbours. To point out this crooked linkage, Fearon and Laitin are quoting Sam C. Sarkesian in their case study: “British administrators reported that Arab traders in the south referred generally to southerners as slaves. Reflecting this division, under the condominium, British administrators argued that the south should be incorporated into Kenya and Uganda, as the people were considered to have affinity with black Africa” (Fearon, Laitin 2006: 4).
Summary of Chapters
1. A Theoretical Prologue: Introduces the actor-oriented methodology and theoretical approaches to understanding civil war as a complex social phenomenon.
2. Introduction: Outlines the historical context of political instability in Sudan and the scope of the study across three distinct time zones.
3. The Background of the First Civil War in Sudan: Examines how British colonial governance created deep-seated north/south cleavages and triggered early resistance.
4. The North Sudanese Government and the Results of the State Weakness: Analyzes the political structures in Khartoum and how state weakness allowed elites to exploit sectarian and regional tensions.
5. The South Sudan and Its Motives: Details the failure of the Addis Ababa Agreement, the lack of regional development, and the mobilization of armed groups.
6. Conclusion: Summarizes the finding that the power struggle between central and regional elites was the primary driver of the second civil war.
7. Appendix: Maps: Provides visual data on rebel activity and the administrative divisions of South Sudan.
8. Bibliography: Lists the academic sources and primary documents used throughout the research.
Keywords
Sudan, Second Sudanese Civil War, Addis Ababa Peace, Elite power struggle, State weakness, Actor-oriented, Al-Numeiri, Anya-Nya, SPLM, Ethnic nationalism, Jonglei Canal, Political instability, Regional autonomy, Sudan People’s Liberation Army, Sudanization.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this research?
The work focuses on the outbreak of the Second Sudanese Civil War, specifically investigating how internal elite power struggles and state failure served as primary triggers for the conflict.
What are the key thematic areas covered?
The main themes include the legacy of British colonial rule, the collapse of the Addis Ababa Peace Accord, the role of natural resources like oil, and the transition of the Sudanese state under the al-Numeiri regime.
What is the primary research question?
The paper asks why the second civil war began in 1983 and examines whether this was primarily due to long-standing cultural grievances or, more significantly, the manipulation of regional and national power dynamics by political elites.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The author employs an actor-oriented approach, analyzing the relations, interests, and perceptions of political actors rather than treating the civil war merely as a military or strategic event.
What is addressed in the main body of the work?
The main body investigates the transition from the end of the first civil war through the period of stability under the Addis Ababa Agreement to the period of escalation and eventual outbreak of renewed political violence.
Which terms best characterize this work?
Key terms include political instability, elite struggle, state weakness, Addis Ababa Agreement, and the transformation of the Sudanese state.
Why did the Addis Ababa Agreement fail?
The agreement failed largely because the central government in Khartoum treated regional autonomy as a political maneuver rather than a sincere commitment, combined with failed development projects and arbitrary administrative changes.
What role did the Muslim Brotherhood play in this period?
The Muslim Brotherhood, particularly under Hassan al-Turabi, provided religious legitimation for al-Numeiri’s authoritarian decisions, which was used to consolidate power and push the country toward an Islamic state model, alienating the South.
How did natural resources influence the conflict?
Disputes over the Jonglei Canal and the discovery of oil in the Bentui region became significant flashpoints, as the central government attempted to centralize control over these lucrative resources at the expense of the Southern region.
- Quote paper
- Anonym (Author), 2008, The Outbreak of the Sudanese Civil War. A Summary, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/346842
